Delhi

West Delhi

CC/16/304

KARAN SINGH THUKRAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

CAR AUTO COMPANY LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

23 Sep 2017

ORDER

  CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

                            GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

  150-151 Community Centre, C-Block, Janak Puri, New Delhi – 110058

 

                                                                                      Date of institution:03.05.2016

Complaint Case. No. 304/16                                       Date of order: 23.09.2017

IN  MATTER OF

 

KARAN SINGH THUKRAL ADVOCATE.  FOR THUKRAL LAW ASSOCIATES BM-179 (L.G.F), SHALIMAR BAGH (WEST) DELHI -110088.

                                                                                                                    Complainant

VERSUS

MR. CAR AUTO COMPANY LTD. through  its  Directors  OFFICE AT A-3, CHOTTEY LAL PARK, KIRTI NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110015.

 

                                                                                                         Opposite party No. 1

 

MS KUSUM KUMARI  R/O H.NO-03/8 UNDER HILL LANE, ATTAR RAHIMAN ROAD CIVIL LINES DELHI-110054

 

                                                                                                      Opposite party No. 2

 

                                                                                                                  

                                                                                                                                   

ORDER

R.S. BAGRI,PRESIDENT

Sh. Karan Singh Thukral named above herein the complainant has filed the present consumer complaint under Sections 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act against Mr. Car Auto Company Ltd and another hereinafter referred as the opposite parties for directions to the opposite parties to pay Rs. 9,50,000/- cost of a Skoda-Superb Elegance car, Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation on account of damages, mental tension, agony, harassment and humiliation and Rs.31,000/-as litigation expenses with interest @18% p.a. from the date of purchase of the car till actual realization.

Briefly, case of the complainant as stated is that the complainant on persuation and assurance of representatives of the opposite party no. 1 and on  representation  of the opposite party no. 2  on  08.11.2015 purchased one pre owned Skoda-Superb Elegance car bearing registration no. DL3CBQ 3031, chasis No. TMBBBD3T8AA300851 from opposite party no. 1 for Rs.9,50,000/-. The car right from first day of purchase has been troubling.  Repeated efforts of the complainant to get the car repaired from the opposite party no. 1 have turned futile. The opposite party no. 1 has not been able to make the car properly functional.  The complainant faced numerous problems qua the car and has been repeatedly visiting/contacting the opposite party no. 1 for removal of the problems.

 That major problems/incidents suffered by the complainant are that on 09.11.2015 on the next day of purchase of the  car white smoke and fumes started coming out from exhaust vent.  The car was taken to the opposite party no. 1 and retained by the opposite party no.1 for repairs. The car was  again sent for repairs to the opposite party no. 1 and received on 20.11.2015.  But it was observed that the defect was not cured.  Whereas another problem with regard to jamming of the automatic transmission started.  The car was again taken   to  the   opposite party no. 1 on the next day.    The  complainant   

 

was  assured  that the  problem   of    white  smoke, fumes and automatic transmission shall be rectified within a week. But on 28.11.2015 when the complainant visited the opposite party no. 1 for delivery of the car he was shocked to observe that white smoke defect was not cured.  The car was found to be defective with regard to automatic transmission and some serious problems with the engine injectors. 

That the opposite party no. 1 referred the car to a local mechanic in Chankaya Puri.  The complainant on 07.12.2015 took the car to the local mechanic in Chankaya Puri.  He refused to help the complainant  as the defects were serious in nature and asked for proper scrutiny by Skoda professional engineers.  There were number of other problems also.  The complainant was harassed and humiliated by negligent and un-professional conduct of the opposite parties.  He has spent money and time in getting his grievances resolved but to no avail. Therefore, the complainant approached Skoda service center for proper diagnoses and repair of the car.  Who after thorough diagnoses of the car told the complainant that the car has serious defects since long.

 That the opposite party no. 1 in December 2015 assured the complainant about replacement of the car.  But despite repeated demands and calls by the complainant the opposite party no. 1 did not respond.  Therefore, the complainant sent a legal notice to  the   opposite  parties.   But

the opposite parties did not reply to the legal notice. Hence the present complaint for directions to the opposite parties to pay Rs. 9,50,000/- cost of a Skoda-Superb Elegance car, Rs. Five lacs as compensation on account of damages, mental tension, agony, harassment and humiliation and Rs.31,000/-as litigation expenses with interest @18% p.a. from the date of purchase of the car till actual realization.

            Notice of the complaint was sent to the opposite parties.  But  despite  service none of the opposite parties appeared. Therefore, the opposite parties were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 14.10.2016.

            When Sh. Karan Singh Thukral  complainant was asked to lead ex-parte evidence he tendered in evidence his affidavit narrating the facts of the complaint.  He also relied upon Exhibit C1 sales and service assured by the opposite party no. 1, Exhibit C-2 registration certificate, Exhibit C-3 Insurance policy, Exhibit C-4 service report, Exhibit C-5 copy of traffic challan, Exhibit C-6 postal receipt, Exhibit C-7 postal receipt and  Exhibit C-8 notice.

            We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the material on record carefully and thoroughly.

            After  having heard  learned counsel for the complainant and going through the complaint, affidavit of the complainant and documents submitted by the complainant  it is clear case of the complainant that he purchased one

second hand pre owned Skoda-Superb Elegance car from the opposite party no. 1.  The complainant has failed to produce or show any document or agreement of sale of the car.  Therefore, in absence of any document or agreement for sale of the car the complainant failed to show any term or condition of after sale service or liability of the opposite party no. 1 towards the  car.  The complainant has filed cash receipt of sale and payment of sale price of the car dated 08.11.2015 wherein it is specifically written that “ The car is sold and delivered in perfect running order and condition, as seen tried  and approved as it stand today.”     Learned counsel for the complainant  also failed to show that there was  after sale liability  of the car of the opposite party no. 1.   The learned counsel for the complainant  has  also failed  to  point out and  show any unfair trade practice or deficiency  in service on the part of the opposite parties.  Therefore, there  is no  merit in the complaint.   Hence the same fails and  is hereby dismissed.

Order pronounced on :  23.09.2017

• Copy of order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
• Thereafter, file be  consigned to record.

 

 

(PUNEET LAMBA)                                                                          (R.S.BAGRI)                              MEMBER                                                                                           PRESIDENT