Man seeks punishment for Tata, Hind Motors
Top Stories
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.
Life of Pi singer Bombay Jayashri to perform in Chandigarh
Theories of Sino-India war far-fetched, says ex-Army chief
HC rejects Punjab plea on Bhattal’s govt house
Civic body moots Rs 616-cr budget, discussion todayEditors’ Pick
- Fixing probe now reaches Bollywood, son of Dara Singh held
- BCCI cashes Pune guarantee, Sahara walks out of IPL
- 'Sree spent Rs 1.95L on clothes, bought friend BlackBerry'
- Delhi firm with MoD as client is linked to Pak cyberattacks
- After Infosys, iGATE sacks Phaneesh Murthy for sexual misconduct
- 2 weeks after harassment, Haryana schoolgirls return, cops in tow
- UPA-2 anniversary today, to showcase achievements of UPA-1
