Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/75/2013

Shanthi Jewellery - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ashok Leyland - Opp.Party(s)

L.Dhamodharan

17 Dec 2021

ORDER

                                                                                                                                                                Date of Complaint Filed: 08.03.2013

                                                                                                                                                                Date of Reservation: 22.11.2021

                                                                                                                                                                Date of Order: 20.12.2021

                                                                                                       

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH)

 

Present:

 

                  Thiru. R.V.R. Deenadayalan, B.A., B.L.                                  : President

                 Thiru. T. Vinodh Kumar, B.A., B.L.                                           : Member

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.75/2013

 

MONDAY, THE 20^th DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

                                

M/s.Shanthi Jewellery,

Rep by its proprietor Mr.S.Pawan kumar,

No.42, Nehru Bazaar,

Avadi, Chennai – 600 054.                                                                         .. Complainant.   

                                                          ..Versus..

 

1.Ashok Leyland, Rep.by its General manager,

   No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai -32.

 

2.Sriram Gegerator,

   No.1, First Floor, Chitlapakkam Main Road,

   Chrompet, Chennai – 600 044.

 

3.Fourstroke Diesel Sales and services,

   No,2, Sai Amirtha Flats, No.10 Gopal Street,

   Annai Indira Nagar, Velachery,

  Chennai- 600 042.

 

   Standard Chartered Bank,

   187, Anna Salai, 2^nd & 3^rd Floor,

  Chennai – 600 006.                                                                        ..  Opposite parties.

******

Counsel for the complainant                            : M/s.L.Dhamodaran, Adv.

Counsel for the 1^st opposite party                   : M/s.K.Moorthy, Advocate.

Counsel the 2^nd & 3^rd opposite parties            : Ex-parte

 

On perusal of both side records and having heard the oral argument of complainant and 1^st opposite party we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by the President Thiru. R.V.R. Deenadayalan, B.A., B.L.

 

The complainant has filed this complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection Act 1986 for seeking direction to replace 30 KVA 451 watts 3ph 0.8PF 50 H₂ 1500 RPM Silent Diesel Generator set and to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony caused to the complainant due to the deficiency in service and with cost.

2. In order to prove the case, on the side of the complainant proof affidavit submitted as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A25 were marked and written argument filed.  While so, on the side of the 1^st opposite party proof affidavit submitted as his evidence and documents Ex.B1 to Ex.B8 were marked, written argument filed. Though written version filed by the 2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties, sufficient opportunity given by this commission to the 2^nd 3^rd opposite parties  to file their proof affidavit they have not turned up before this commission and hence they were set ex-parte.

            3. The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant purchased 30 KVA 451 watts 3ph 0.8PF 50 H₂ 1500 RPM Silent Diesel Generator set from the 2^nd opposite party. The 2^nd opposite party claimed a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- towards total costs for the generator including fixes and other works. Complainant agreed to purchase and made a payment of Rs.3,90,000/- on 10.04.2012.  The 2^nd opposite party delivered the machinery on 23.04.2012. The 2^nd opposite party issued the bills for a sum of Rs.3,15.000/- dated 23.04.2012, a sum of Rs.3500/- dated 01.07.2012 and a bill dated 05.10.2012 for a sum of Rs.1,16,273/-.    

2. From the day one of the purchase of the generator set the complainant has been made to keep on calling the service center to attend the falls one after another.  The details of the complaint have been listed below.

S.No	Date of complaint	Fault reported and attended
1	13.06.2012	Attended the engine checked water level, fan belt tension,  wiring.  Old oil was replaced.  Oil filter, diesel filter were replaced.  Oil leak from IFP timing cover remove used RVT parts and tightened.  Air bleed from fuel line start the engine and trial runs and taken with load in 23 Amps in 15 minutes.  Engine performance OK.
2	14.08.2012	Engine attended for water leak, water leak from block, water leak also come from engine head gasket, radiator water level checked.
3	05.09.2012 to 06.09.2012	Water leak from engine block.  Attend engine, confirmed this problem.  So removed engine and fixed new engine and outside door, fuel line, air bleed from fuel line, started engine with the load 22 Amps engine performance normal.
4	22.09.2012	Coolant leak, voltage flux and engine not stopping.  Attended for the complaint, arrested oil leak on FIP front housing cap, engine not stopped, adjusted stop coil lever, arrested coolant leak, checked oil and coolant and belt function, started engine and made trial for 20 minutes, performance is normal.
5.	10.10.2012	Coolant leak.  Attend the coolant leak, water pump fitment bolt, bolt tight, coolant leak, engine trip, FIP pump 1450 low FIP pump RPM, not adjusted, engine trial running performance ok.
6.	14.10.2012	Engine not starting.  Attend the engine, not starting problem, found the problem, lift pump not working.  So remove the old lift pump.  Refitted the new lift pump.  All hoses right check-up, leakage check-up.  Air bleeds the fuel system, then start the engine, check the voltage.
7.	22.10.2012	Engine not stopping, engine attended for not stopping, problem found on loose connection of stop coil wiring, it was tighten, wiring kit was touch in exhaust manifold, it was send down and problem was rectified, engine start and trial run are taken, engine performance OK.
8.	31.10.2012	Engine not stopping, after the complaint found the problem, confirmed the stop coil problem, then start the engine switch off the engine, stop coil working properly.
9.	10.12.2012	Engine stop coil change, engine not stopping, all the wiring changing, stop coil changing, problem solved.

 

The above said particulars will clearly prove that the generator set manufactured by the 1^st opposite party and sold by the 2^nd opposite party is not only a defective one and the same is a substandard one.  Apart from that the complainant also came to know that the engine in the generator set is not manufactured by the 1^st opposite party.  The engine from china has been imported and branded as manufacturer by the 1st opposite party. The very object of purchase is not been fulfill since the same goes on fault on and often and subject the complainant hardship and agony. Furthermore, the 2^nd opposite party has collected the major possession of the amount has failed to supply the materials listed in the specification. Hence complainant caused a notice calling upon the opposite parties to replace the generator set and to pay a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for the mental agony and hardships under gone by the complainant.  Even after the notice the generator set went on fault 31.01.2013.  Hence this complaint is filed.

3. Written version of the 1^st opposite party in brief:-

The 1^st opposite party only admits to the extent that the complainant had purchased AL Gen set from M/s.Shriram Gen set. The 1^st opposite party understands that the complainant has to still make balance payment for the purchase made by the complainant to the 2^nd opposite party for the aforesaid AL Gen set.  It is further stated that as there was belated payments from the complainant for the installation of the diesel generator set, the 2^nd opposite party was constrained to deliver the bills belatedly.  It is also pertinent to note that there was still outstanding pending on the part of the complainant to the 2^nd opposite party.

4. The 1^st opposite party states that whenever the complainant had referred the matter, the 1^st opposite party’s service provider, the same was attended on priority and on the same day as can been established from the job card details.  In all the job cards, the complainant after the service has expressed his satisfaction on the working of the generator.  The 1^st opposite party states that there is no defect in the generator set supplied to the complainant as alleged by the complainant.

5. Furthermore, in order to satisfy the complainant, the engine of the diesel generator was also replaced.  It is denied that from the date of purchase the complainant was constrained to call the service centre to faults one after another.  It is also denied that the authorized dealer and service persons failed to respond as alleged by the complainant. It is denied that the generator set manufactured by the 1^st opposite party and sold by the 2^ndopposite party is defective and substandard one. The 1^st opposite party states that in terms of warranty policy, the complainant is not entitled to claim to replacement of the diesel generator. The 1^st opposite party states that they have sent a suitable reply to the notice issued to the complainant. The 1^st opposite party states that all the grievances however minor it may be from the complainant was duly attended and rectified and the field service reports attached along with this version contained the signature of the complainant which proves that he has been satisfied of his requirements for the proper functioning of the diesel generator. The complainant is not a consumer in terms of Section 2(1) of the Consumer Protection act and he is not entitled as against the 1^st opposite party

6. Written version of the 2^nd opposite party in brief:-

The complainant had purchased the generator manufactured by the 1^st opposite party which was sold as such by the 2^nd opposite party.  They have no role in respect its manufacture, design and technical specifications as well as not liability towards its warranty.  Thereafter, sales support are all undertaken only by the 1^st opposite party and 2^nd opposite party has duly delivered all the materials as per specification to the satisfaction of the complainant. As a matter of fact, the complainant is still has an outstanding due of Rs.60,000/- payable to the 2^nd opposite party out of total sale price of Rs.4,50,000/- including cost of installation.  The allegation that the total price was agreed as Rs.3,90,000/- is not correct.  The complainant has paid only Rs.3,90,000/- and in spite of several request has not paid the balance for no reason.  The purpose of this complaint as against the 2^nd opposite party is only to avoid further payment on flimsy allegations as against the 2^nd opposite party.  Hence the compliant is made with mala fide, ulterior motives to harass this opposite party and the same is liable to be rejected.

7. Written version of the 3^rd opposite party in brief:-

The 3^rd opposite party is only an authorized service provider on behalf of the 1^st opposite party.  This opposite party will attended after sales support of the customers of the 1^st opposite parties, as and when instructed by them. The present allegation is contrary to records and has been put forth only for the purpose of the case.  The periodical service and checkups were correctly done by the opposite party and the complainant exaggerates the minor problems as if the gen set has not functioned.

8.The points for consideration are:-

            1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get reliefs as claimed in the complaint?

3) To what relief the complainant is entitled to?

Point No.1:-

8. Complainant is carrying on jewelry business.   Due to frequent power cut he intent to purchase diesel generator set.  Accordingly he purchased a new 30 KVA 451 watts 3ph 0.8PF 50 H₂ 1500 RPM Silent Diesel Generator set from the 2^nd opposite party who is the dealer of the 1^st opposite party. The 3^rd opposite party is the service provider of the 1^st opposite party. The above facts are admitted by both parties.  

9. The generator set was installed on 23.04.2012.  within a short span of 6 months from the date of purchase the generator set has developed various faults and thereby complainant called upon service people on 13.06.2012, 14.08.2012, 05.09.2012 to 06.09.2012, 22.09.2012, 10.10.2012, 14.12.2012, 31.10.2012, 10.12.2012.  Hence the complainant call for the opposite parties to replace a new gen set.  After causing notice also it is stated that the gen set was went on fault on 31.01.2013. Hence this complaint was filed on 15.02.2013. Before filling this complaint and after filing this complaint the gen set was faulted on 02.02.2013, 07.03.2013, 22.03.2013, 05.04.2013, 25.07.2013, 31.05.2013, 03.06.2013 and 31.06.2013.  Each and every time the 3^rd opposite party attended the fault and rectify the same. However on perusal it is found that the gen set was under repair minimum ones or twice even more time in a month from the date of purchase. Therefore it is evidence that the very object of the purchase is not fulfilled since the gen set goes on fault, on and often.  Therefore we found that the gen set which was purchased by the complainant from the 2^nd opposite party is a defective one.  Accordingly point No.1 is answered.

10.Point Nos.2&3:-

We have discussed and decided that the diesel generator set which was purchased by the complainant from the 2^nd opposite party is a defective one.  Hence the 1^st and 2^nd opposite party shall replace a new diesel generator set to the complainant.  Further the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties are liable to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony caused to the complainant and Rs.21,773/- towards litigation expenses.   However complainant has paid only Rs.3,90,000/- instead of 4,61,773/- towards total sale consideration. Therefore complainant has to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs.71,773/- to the 2^nd opposite party.  Instead of payment of compensation and cost by the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties to the complainant, they shall adjusted the above amount with the balance sale consideration to be paid by the complainant.

11. The 3^rd opposite party is only a service provider.  Hence he is not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant. Accordingly point Nos.2&3 are answered

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.  It is directed that the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties shall jointly and severely liable to replace a new 30 KVA 451 watts 3ph 0.8PF 50 H₂ 1500 RPM Silent Diesel Generator set within three months from the date of this order. This complaint is dismissed as against the 3^rd opposite party.

Dictated to steno-typist, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open commission, on this the 20^th day of December 2021.

 

VINODH KUMAR                                                                  R.V.R.DEENADAYALAN

         MEMBER                                                                             PRESIDENT

 

List of documents filed by the complainant:-

Ex.A1	07.04.2012	Purchase order.	Xerox
Ex.A2	2304.2012	Invoice	Xerox
Ex.A3	01.07.2012	Invoice	Xerox
Ex.A4	05.10.2012	Tax invoice	Xerox
Ex.A5	13.06.2012	Complaint	Xerox
Ex.A6	13.06.2012	Tax invoice by the 3rd opposite party.	Xerox
Ex.A7	14.08.2012	Complaint	Xerox
Ex.A8	06.09.2012	Complaint	Xerox
Ex.A9	22.09.2012	Complaint	Xerox
Ex.A10	10.10.2012	Complaint	Xerox
Ex.A11	14.10.2012	Complaint	Xerox
Ex.A12	22.10.2012	Complaint	Xerox
Ex.A13	31.10.2012	Complaint	Xerox
Ex.A14	10.12.2013	Complaint	Xerox
Ex.A15	12.01.2013	Lawyer’s notice.	Xerox
Ex.A16		Acknowledgement card.	Xerox
Ex.A17	31.01.2013	Reply notice of the 1st opposite party	Xerox
Ex.A18	02.02.2013	Service report.	Xerox
Ex.A19	07.03.2013	Service report.	Xerox
Ex.A20	22.03.2013	Service report.	Xerox
Ex.A21	05.04.2013	Service report.	Xerox
Ex.A22	27.05.2013	Service report.	Xerox
Ex.A23	31.05.2013	Service report.	Xerox
Ex.A24	03.06.2013	Service report.	Xerox
Ex.A25	31.06.2013	Service report.	Xerox

 

List of documents filed by the 1^st opposite party:-

Ex.B1	14.08.2012	Job card.	Xerox
Ex.B2	22.09.2012	Job card	Xerox
Ex.B3	10.10.2012	Job card	Xerox
Ex.B4	14.10.2012	Job card	Xerox
Ex.B5	22.10.2012	Job card	Xerox
Ex.B6	31.10.2012	Job card	Xerox
Ex.B7	10.12.2012	Job card	Xerox
Ex.B8	31.01.2013	Job card	Xerox

 

VINODH KUMAR                                                                  R.V.R.DEENADAYALAN

         MEMBER                                                                             PRESIDENT