Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
R.K. Agrawal, J
Daya Anil Motors v. Mukesh Kumar
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the revision petition's legal foundation under the consumer protection act. (Para 1) |
| 2. details about the complainant's purchase and issues with the three wheeler. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments regarding evidence and claims of manufacturing defects. (Para 5 , 10) |
| 4. implications of evidence and burden of proof on the complainant. (Para 6 , 8 , 12 , 14) |
| 5. conclusion on revising the appeal and allowing the revision petition. (Para 16) |
1. This revision petition has been filed under S.21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the ˜Act) against the order dated 25.1.2012 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana (in short, ˜the State Commission) in First Appeal No. 90 of 2012.
2. In brief, the facts of the case are that respondent No. 1 / complainant had purchased a three wheeler scooter (Vikram 410 G make) bearing registration number DL - 1 LH - 2898 from the petitioner in November 2006 for a price of Rs 1,45,108 excluding insurance charges. The complainant paid Rs. 35,000 and Rs. 95,150 was financed by respondent No. 2. The balance of Rs 14,958 was to be paid by the respondent no. 1 by 2.1.2007. On 2.1.2007 the respondent No. 1 issued a chequ
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
