SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 462

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
MR. MICHEL EDINBURGH – Appellant
Versus
M/S. FORD INDIA LTD. – Respondent


ORDER

ORDER

Per – Hon’ble Mr. Shashikant A. Kulkarni, Presiding Judicial Member This is consumer complaint filed under Section-17 read with Section-12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (CP Act).

The Complainant is an individual and a ‘consumer’ whereas, the Opponent No.1 is the manufacturer of cars and the Opponent No.2 is its dealer and ‘service providers’, within the meaning of the C.P. Act.

The Complainant purchased a car viz. ‘Ford Ikon 1.6’ on 21/03/2001 for an amount of Rs.6,38,439/- from the Opponent No.2. Immediately after purchase, when he drove the car on the road, he found that there was unusual abnormal noise while shifting the gears. He pointed out the defects to the Opponent No.2. The Opponent No.2 took the car for servicing. However, the defects persisted and thereby, the Complainant himself on 13/02/2002 left the car with the workshop of the Opponent No.2 and demanded a new car or his money back. On denial, therefore, by alleging ‘

deficiency in service’, the Complainant has filed this consumer complaint in the year

2002.

The Opponents have filed their written version. It is denied that there was any mechanical defect in the car. The defects, which were minor, requiring

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top