Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 147 (0.97 seconds)

M/S Vrindavan Autos vs Naresh Kumar Singla on 7 May, 2015

part of the said scooter, assuring the complainant that scooter would give the trouble free service henceforward. The manufacturing defect in the scooter ... cannot be manufacturing defect. No expert evidence was led by the complainant to prove the manufacturing defect in the scooter. We further rely upon
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

T.V.S. Motor vs Vivek Goel on 22 September, 2015

record to hold that any of this particular scooter had manufacturing defect and did not satisfy the assured mileage. In the absence of any evidence ... inspite of several efforts to rectify the defects, the manufacturer would be liable to either replace the scooter by a new one or to refund
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Nuzhat vs Director, C.K. Birla & Another on 15 December, 2015

four doors were operated normally, therefore, there were no manufacturing defects found in any component of the vehicle. From the perusal of the expert reports ... Similarly in the case of Scooter India Ltd. (supra) the complainant failed to discharge onus of proving manufacturing defect.  In view of the above, this
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Girish vs The Oriental Ins.Co.Ltd on 2 July, 2015

suffered permanent disability. 11. The respondents have not examined the rider of Scooter bearing No.KA-02-L-7203 to rebut the evidence ... mechanical defects of the vehicle. The police have filed chargesheet against the rider of Scooter bearing No.KA-02-L-7203 for causing grievous injury
Bangalore District Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next