New buy can’t break down. Period

Pushpa Girimaji

I bought a tractor last year but have never been able to make use of it. From day one, it has been giving me trouble and I have been constantly giving it for repairs. This has not only caused me a lot of distress, but has also affected my farming activities. I have asked the company several times to give me a replacement or a refund, but they are not agreeing to it. 

This is really unfortunate. If you have an association of farmers in your village, I would suggest that you send a letter to the manufacturer through the association, asking for a refund and compensation. That may force them to act. You can also send your complaint to www.consumerhelpline.gov.in. This is the helpline of the Union Ministry of Consumer Affairs. You can also SMS your complaint to 8130009809. Hopefully, they will be able to resolve it. Or else you will have to go to the consumer court, but seek mediation, which is a quicker way of resolving the issue.

If you still have confidence in this manufacturer, you can ask for a new tractor in lieu of the defective one. Otherwise, it is best to ask for a full refund, besides compensation for the loss in farming and the harassment undergone. If you have taken a loan to buy it and are paying interest, take that also into consideration while seeking compensation. If you are going to the consumer court, you can also ask for punitive damages and cost of litigation.

Can you cite a similar case?

I would refer to SAS Motors Ltd Vs Anant Haridas Choudhari (Revision Petition No 2814 of 2011) decided on July 24, 2013 by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The complainant, a farmer residing at Atahrdi Tal Kalamb in Osmanabad, Maharashtra, bought on February 5, 2005, a tractor from SAS Motors and paid Rs 1,31,000 for the tractor and the plough . However, within 12 days of purchase, it had to be taken for repair to the showroom. The farmer found several defects in the vehicle upon use.

When these defects continued to haunt him, he filed a complaint before the consumer forum at the district level, which dismissed it. The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, before which he filed an appeal, set aside the order of the lower court and directed that the consumer be paid the cost of the tractor, along with 9 per cent interest from the date of purchase and Rs 15,000 towards compensation.

Aggrieved, the opposite party filed a revision petition before the apex consumer court, arguing that the State Commission had concluded that the tractor was defective without any documentary evidence and it had interpreted the normal wear and tear as defects. Besides, no expert evidence was taken.

Dismissing these contentions, the apex consumer court referred to the job cards produced by the farmer, from which it was obvious that the vehicle suffered various defects. While initially, the defects included broken lower link pin, oil leakage and clutch setting, even after repairs, these problems occurred again and there was the additional problem of the tractor not moving. Subsequently, in April, the water pump had to be changed, dynamo belt had also broken. Then the alternator failed and had to be changed. Next, there was hydraulic arm oil leakage and the battery failed. The tire rim of the front left side had to be changed too. Thus, during February 23, 2005 to June 20, 2005, the tractor remained in the showroom for a total of 38 days and the farmer had to traverse a distance of 30 km each way every time.

Dismissing the revision petition with costs of Rs 10,000 and upholding the order of the State Commission, the apex consumer court pointed out that when so many defects occurred and some of them within just 12 days from purchase and the job cards confirmed them, there was no need for any expert evidence.