Date of filing: 09.02.2016 Date of Final Order: 27.10.2016
The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying for replacement by new vehicle or to refund his entire amount.
The complainant’s case, in brief, is that the complainant purchased one Scooty Jupiter on 23.12.15 from the OP for Rs.53, 475/- and got delivery on 23.12.15. For getting delivery of the said Scooty at night, in the morning he found some defects of the vehicle in which are – mobile was leaking from the engine, rust was found in some places, rubbing marks in one place on the body, the colour of the stain was discoloured and in the meter reading was 100 K.m and wire of the meter was cut off. Thereafter, the complainant informed the OP about the above defects and then the OP asked him to come to the show-room with the Scooty and when the complainant going to the show room with the scooty showed the defect and demanded replacement by new one, he did not agreed to it at any cost. Then, the complainant informed the matter to Consumer Affairs Deptt on 7.01.16 and for settlement 02.02.16 was fixed for leaving at 12.30 p.m the complainant appeared but the OP did not turn up. Then without getting any relief, the complainant was compelled to file the instant case before this Forum. Hence, the complainant’s case.
Inspite of service of notice the OP has not turned up. Then, the case is taking up for hearing ex parte.
In this case the complainant has adduced evidence on affidavit and has filed the relevant documents in support of his case.
In this case the complainant has claimed for replacement by a new Scooty or in the alternative claimed for refund of the entire amount paid. Where, he has not claimed for interest on the amount he has paid.
Regarding replacement by new vehicle the settled principle is that manufacturing defect in the vehicle in question is to be established for replacement.
In this case there is no opinion of any expert as to the manufacturing defect in the impugned vehicle (Scooty).
Regarding the alleged defect the complainant has filed four photographs of the vehicle showing defects.
But, those are not relating to any manufacturing defects.
Also, there is no report of any expert or mechanic who examined when the impugned vehicle (Scooty) was taken to the show-room of OP.
The complainant’s case is that when the vehicle was taken to the shop-room of OP for replacement showing the defects the OP refused to replace.
To get replacement as per settled rules, already discussed, manufacturing defect is to be prove d but the complainant has f ailed to prove the same.
The photographs of the vehicle showing defects without any expert opinion to our mind those defects are repairable and the same is not a manufacturing defect and for that we can safely conclude that the complaint is not entitled to get replacement by new vehicle but he is entitled to get the vehicle repaired and make it in running condition on road free of cost.
Considering the above discussions as a whole we find that the complaint be allowed ex parte.
Hence,
Ordered
that the Consumer Complaint No. 24/2016 be and the same is allowed in part ex parte.
The complainant is entitled to get the vehicle repaired and make it in running condition on road free of cost.
The complainant is to produce the vehicle in question to the OP-showroom immediately and the OP is directed repair the vehicle and make it in running condition free of cost within two months from the date of sending the vehicle to his show room and in default the OP is to pay Rs.50/- per day’s delay and the amount so accumulated shall be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid Account.
Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgment / be sent forthwith under ordinary post to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.
