M.SHREESHA, S.BHUJANGA RAO
Irugurala Laxmi, Pathem Padma, Inreddy Srinivas Reddy, Bandari Rayudu, Gantala Vijaya – Appellant
Versus
Shakti Farm Machinery – Respondent
ORDER :
1. All the above applications are disposed of by this common order and CCIA No. 273/2013 in CC No. 109/2012 is taken as lead case.
2. This is an application filed by the complainant u/s 151 of C.P.C. praying to direct the respondents/opposite parties to cause production of ‘Product Concern Reports’ of the harvester of the complainant from the date of purchase till the date of filing the complaint on the ground that the harvester purchased by her on 3.2.2010 through Op1 manufactured by Op2 by paying an amount of Rs. 21,75,000/- had suffered inherent manufacturing defects relating to engine, gear box, crawler etc. The petitioner/complainant submits that the engine was repaired on 1.5.2011 and the crawler was replaced on seven occasions. She further contended that assemble transmission was repaired and replaced nearly on eight occasions. The opposite parties modified and replaced the parts four times. She submits that as on the date of filing of the complaint the harvester was held up for 30 months.
3. The petitioner/complainant submits that the opposite parties maintain a separate Product Concern Report for each and every harvester whenever the harvester was taken to Op1 for rep
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.