Haryana

Sonipat

335/2014

AKASH S/O SHIV KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. TRIUMPHA AUTO SALES PVT. LTD.,2. HONDA MOTORCYCLE & SCOOTER INDIA PVT. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

I.J. KHOKHAR

16 Oct 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

                     SONEPAT.

 

                             Complaint No.335 of 2014

                             Instituted on:05.12.2014

                             Date of order:16.10.2015

 

Akash son of Shiv Kumar, resident of W. NO.10, Jeewan Nagar, Sonepat.

                                      ...Complainant.

 

                      Versus

 

 

1.M/s Triumph Auto Sales Pvt. Ltd., Sonepat near Civil Hospital Bhalgarh road, Sonepat through its Prop.

2.Honda Motor Cycle and Scooter India Pvt. Ltd. Plot no.1, Sector 3, IMT Maneshwar Distt. Gurgaon, through its Manager.

                                      ...Respondents.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. I.J. Khokhar, Adv. for complainant.

           Sh. PK Bhagat, Adv. for respondent no.1.

           Respondent no.2 ex-parte on 10.08.2015.

 

BEFORE-    Nagender Singh, PRESIDENT.

          Prabha Wati, MEMBER.

          D.V. Rathi, MEMBER.

 

O R D E R

 

         Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging therein that on 18.10.2014, he has purchased a motor cycle from respondents for Rs.46715/-. After its use, the complainant found that both the tyre of the motor cycle were cracked. The complainant made complaint in this regard to the respondents, but in vain.  The complainant has purchased the motor cycle on 18.10.2014 whereas the respondent no.1 intentionally handed over the model of Feb/2014 and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.       The respondent no.1 has filed the reply, whereas the respondent no.2 was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 10.08.2015.

         The respondent no.1 in its reply has denied the fact that the complainant ever approached regarding the replacement of tyres of the motorcycle.   The complainant has purchased the motor cycle on 18.10.2014. The complainant has never visited to the office or workshop/service centre of the respondent no.1 nor has shown the motor cycle or the tyres which allegedly got cracked and in the absence of the same, the respondent no.1 is not liable to compensate the complainant in any manner. There is also no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent no.1 and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.       Both the parties have been heard at length.  All the documents placed on record by both the parties have been perused carefully & minutely.

4.       After hearing both the learned counsel for the parties at length and after going through the entire relevant records available on the case file very carefully, we are of the view that the complainant has failed to prove any kind of deficiency in service on the part of the respondents.  The entire pleadings shows that the complainant has leveled false and baseless allegations against the respondents.    To prove the same, the complainant has failed to lead any cogent and elaborate evidence.  The complainant has alleged that he purchased the motor cycle and after its use, he found that both the tyre of the motor cycle were cracked.  But there is no expert report from the side of the complainant regarding the defective tyres.  The complainant has also not made any written complaint to the company.  The complainant has also not protested for the said defective tyres at the time of getting his motor cycle serviced from the respondent no.1.  So, in our view, merely alleging allegation is of no avail and to prove the same, the onus heavily lies on the complainant and cogent evidence is required, which in the present complaint is totally missing. Thus, we find no force in the present complaint and it has no merit and we dismiss the same with no order as to costs.

         Certified copies of order be provided to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)    (DV Rathi)                (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF     Member DCDRF              DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced:16.10.2015