SURJIT SINGH, CHANDER SHEKHAR SHARMA, PREM CHAUHAN
Harvinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
Mohindra And Mohindra Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Surjit Singh, President
Appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 28.09.2012, of learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kangra at Dharamshala, whereby his complaint, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, which he filed against the respondents, has been dismissed with the finding that the allegations made by him do not stand established.
2. Appellant purchased a Scorpio vehicle from respondent No. 2, M/s. Goel Motors Private Limited, Mohali, on 12.11.2009, under a warranty for two years or coverage of 50000 kilometers, whichever occurred earlier. According to him, vehicle broke down, when being taken by him to his native place from Pathankot, on 25.10.2010. It was taken to Universal Motors, Pathankot, who happened to be one of the authorized repairers of the manufacturer of the vehicle, impleaded as opposite party No. 1, and respondent No. 1, herein. Said repairer charged Rs. 2,000/- for opening and resetting the engine. After opening the engine, the said repairer told the appellant that there was some serious defect in the engine, which he was unable to rectify.
3. Vehicle was then taken to another authorized service station of respondent No. 1,
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.