Man seeks punishment for Tata, Hind Motors

After failing to comply with the orders of the state commission for consumer disputes redressal, the complainant has moved the court stating that Tata Motors and Hind motors should be liable for punishment under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

In May 21, 2010, Manmohal Lal Sarin had bought a faulty Tata Nano car and after many repair attempts by the company failed to meet the satisfaction of the complainant.

A petition was then moved to the consumer disputes redressal commission stating that orders passed by the forum on July 6, 2012 have not been complied to.

The complainant said the firm was supposed to pay a sum of Rs 35,000 and repair the car. However, on November 7, 2011 the complainants received a draft of Rs 35, 000 dated August, validity of which had expired. The draft was from M/s Banarsi Dass Automobiles Limited, Panchkula, who were not a party in the case.

Tata Motors and Hind Motors Wednesday moved an application saying they want to pay the entire amoount, however the complainant had demanded punishment for the two parties.

Please read our terms of use before posting comments
TERMS OF USE: The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
comments powered by Disqus