Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
HON’BLE MR. SUBHASH CHANDRA, PRESIDING MEMBER, HON’BLE AVM J. RAJENDRA, MEMBER
M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Limited – Appellant
Versus
Shri Jumpe Maro – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of consumer complaint and appeal background. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. the issue of transfer of appeal before the national commission. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments regarding the continuity of appeals and complaints. (Para 6 , 12) |
| 4. discussion on legislative intent and transfer provisions. (Para 8 , 18) |
| 5. conclusion and direction for transfer of proceedings. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
JUDGMENT
AVM J. RAJENDRA, AVSM VSM (RETD.), MEMBER
1. The matter pertains to a Consumer Complaint filed by the Complainants/Respondents who purchased a Mahindra XUV300 manufactured by the Applicant herein alleging certain deficiencies in service. The learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Papum Pare District, Yupia, Arunachal Pradesh partially allowed the Complaint vide order dated 31.03.2023 in Consumer Complaint No. CA (PP) 02/2020 finding deficiency in service against all the Opposite Parties (OPs) which includes Applicant and the Dealer. The Opposite Parties were directed to pay a consolidated amount of Rs.1,70,000 to the Complainant/ Respondent within next 30 days, failing which they were to pay an additional interest @ 12% on the said amount till the realization of the amount.
2. A
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
