Ram Ratan Mishra vs Union of India, & Anr.

Complainant is before us in the revision petition. This complaint against respondent bank and a dealer from where complainant purchased power tiller tractor, was dismissed by the District Forum. His appeal to the State Commission was also dismissed.

Complainant purchased power tiller tractor with trolley from the second respondent, the dealer which was financed by the first respondent bank. Tractor was purchased on 15.10.1994. It was complained on 30.1.1995 that there were defects in the tractor and it was sent for repairs on 3.2.1995 to workshop of the second respondent, from where complainant took back the same on 9.2.1995. Case of the second respondent is that whatever repair was required, it was done. After 9.2.1995 nothing was heard from the complainant and suddenly he filed a complaint before the District Forum on 8.9.1997. Complainant was unable to explain as to why over two years, he kept quiet if his tractor was still having defects. Rejecting the complaint both on merit and even on limitation, it was observed by the District Forum that there was no deficiency in service. As noted above, the appeal by the complainant to the State Commission was dismissed. We find no ground for us to exercise our jurisdiction under clause (b) of Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act. Revision petition is dismissed.