Punjab

Rupnagar

CC/22/167

Ajmer Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bhakra Service Station - Opp.Party(s)

25 Jul 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, RUPNAGAR

             Complaint Case No. 167 of 2022

               Decided on :           25.07.2023

Ajmer Singh S/O Ranjit Singh Village Hambewal Post office Nangal Nikku Tehsil Nangal District Rupnagar Punjab 140124.

                                                                                                        ……Complainant

VERSUS

 

Bhakra Service Station  Chandigarh  Road Nangal Dam Tehsil Nangal District Ropar  Punjab 140124.

                                                                                             ..….Opposite Party (OP)

(Complaint under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act)

QUORUM:

RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER

RAMESH KUMAR GUPTA, MEMBER

 

ARGUED BY:

 

For complainant: Ajmer Singh , Complainant

For OP:               Sh. Mandeep Moudgill Adv.   

                                                                                                                            

 ORDER

         PER RANVIR KAUR MEMBER

1.  It is submitted that Sh. Ajmer Singh Son of Ranjit Singh Resident of village Hambewal Post Office Nikku Nangal Tehsil Nangal District Rupnagar  purchased a Bajaj Platina 110 ES Disc BS6 Charcola Black (Met) with Registration Number PB 74 C 4175 and Chasis Number MD2B77AX2MRG7134 from the OP.
2.  Complainant submitted that  OP befooled him by selling bike with the Default/wrong parts. He informed the OP about  his problems  but OP ignored his concerns and replaced Bike parts like(Clutch , Gearbox, Carborator) on several occasions but his bike still not working properly.
3. That he was facing problems like shifting second gear and then he approached the OP but they said  come on service time. On service of bike they exchanged parts  and after that bike started clutch problem .
4. That he purchased the said bike on 13-July-2022. But the manufacturing date of the bike is October 2021.
5. That when he purchased the same on 13.07.2022 then many faults found in the same and the same he informed immediately  to the OP.
6. That all the supporting documents of the communication regarding the complaint is attached herewith for ready reference/.
7. That complainant sought the following relief against the OP:-

1. Replacement of Bike or refund of amount he paid .

 

The respondent submitted their written statements as under:-

 

1. That in reply to the complaint, it is submitted that the instant complaint has been filed by the complainant against the answering OP on the basis of totally wrong, false, frivolous and fictitious and baseless facts just to get an undue advantage from this Hon'ble Court.
2. It is further submitted that in fact the complainant had visited the answering opposite party on 13.07.2022 for purchase of Bike and he took the test drive and inspected the Bike in question. The complainant was informed that the Bike in question as  a 2021 model  vehicle and then the  Complainant Started bargaining on the discount ,upon which ,after striking  the bargain, delivery of the bike in questin was given to the complainant as he had paid the settled amount and at the time of taking delivery of the bike ,the complainant had shown full satisfaction voucher qua the vehicle in question by mentioning the model of the vehicle and at that time , there was  not any problem  reported by the complainant  in the bike in question and the complainant had also got affixed HSRP places on the said bike 21.07.2022.

 

3. That thereafter the complainant had also visited the workshop of the opposite party No.1 for the first service of the Bike in question on 19.08.2022 after driving of the Bike at 456 KM and at that time, the service of the bike was done and the complainant had also signed the job card showing his full satisfaction qua the same to the effect that he had received the vehicle duly serviced to his entire satisfaction.

 

 

4. That thereafter the complainant again visited the workshop of the answering OP only for tightening the chain of the Bike, which was also done on 14.09.20222; KM and this time also, the complainant had also given his satisfaction by signing the job card.

 

5. That thereafter on 22.09.2022, the complainant again visited the workshop of the answering OP and his problem was resolved, but the complainant denied to sign the requisite document and used abusive words.

 

6. That it is further submitted that on 01.10.2022, the officials of the answering OP visited the complainant's home and took the test drive of the vehicle in question, but no issue was found therein and at that time also, the complainant was asked as if, he is not satisfied with any of the feature or function of the Bike in question, then he may come to the workshop of the answering opposite party.

 

7.  It Therefore prayed that the complaint under reply filed by the complainant is without any merit and as such , the same may kindly be dismissed with costs,in the interest of justice.

 

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the complaint file along with documents very minutely. From the pleadings of the parties and evidence led by them following  factual position has come on record:-

1.  The complainant has bought  the bike of 2021 Model on 13-07-2022  by settling the sale amount accordingly.
2. Due to complaints from time to time  the complainant has been visiting the workshop of the OP and the OP to the best of his capacity  has been repeatedly rendering the services.
3. On 22-09-2022  the complainant again visited the workshop of the OP, when the later again  rendered the services but allegedly the complainant denied to sign the documents
4. Lastly on 01-10-2022 , OPs officials even visited complainant’s home to render the services regarding repair of the bike to the satisfaction of the complainant.
5. On the other hand the complainant has failed to prove on record any inherent manufacturing defect in the vehicle in question.
6. In the light of the afore-said discussion ,the complainant is not entitled to get the bike replaced with the new bike nor he is entitled to be returned the sale price.
7. However in the circumstances of the case   OP is liable to repair the vehicle in question regarding the complaints/defects by the complainant.
8. The complainant will produce the vehicle in question in the workshop of the OP within 15 days of the date of the order and the OP is liable to repair the same within next 15 days . Including the change of any spare part if so required to make the vehicle in question free of all defects at  free of cost.
9. Further in the circumstances of the case there is no order as to cost as compensation and litigation expenses.
10. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, as per rules.
11.  The file be indexed & consigned to the Record Room.

Dated :-25.07.2023

 

 

                                      (RAMESH KUMAR GUPTA)                                            (RANVIR KAUR)

                                           MEMBER                                                                              MEMBER