Delhi

North East

CC/113/2021

Mr. Pankaj Aggarwal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Delight Motor Plaza - Opp.Party(s)

11 Nov 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 113/21

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

 

In the matter of:

 

	Pankaj Aggarwal C-41/Z-2, Dilshad Garden Delhi-110095	Complainant
	Versus
	Director /GM Delight Motor Plaza Main Loni Road, Bhopra, Near Bharat Petrolium Shalimar City, Ghaziabad(U.P)	Opposite Party

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:        JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:               DATE OF DECISION      :

03.09.2021 08.09.2022 11.11.2022

 

 

ORDER

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer protection Act, 2019.

 

Case of the Complainant

1.  The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that Sh. Chetan Aggarwal is the registered owner of car bearing registration no. DL7CH-6166 and the said car make Alto was purchased in the year 2009. The Complainant is the user of the said car. The Complainant got his car service on 06.08.2021 as the engine of the car used to stop working suddenly and there was also noise coming from the engine of the car. The service advisor stated that noise in car was due to problem of clutch plates, timing belt and engine de-carbonizing etc., need to be done the work in timing belt etc. and same was consented on the promise that all these defects would be rectified. Delight motor plaza handed over the car to the Complainant at 07.30 pm on the same day with bill raised for the amount of Rs. 9,734- approx. On 08.08.2021 Sunday when the Complainant along with his family was going to his relative place, car show the same problem which were there before doing the service of the car, then the Complainant called on phone the service advisor on Monday morning regarding the same problem and Service advisor asked the complainant to come on Tuesday. Then the Complainant visited the workshop and the Technician told him that the engine used to stop suddenly due to short wiring. The technician changed the said wire and the bill for Rs. 1,149/- was raised for the said changed of wire. After that Complainant came to know that on 06.08.2021 during service of the car the workshop staff broke the electrical current generator body that’s why there was a loud noise from the engine. They tried to fix it with Elfie etc. but did not succeed. The same problem was still there even after spending more than Rs. 12,000/- (approx) on two visit.  The workshop failed to find out rectify the defect. Complainant had also contract book of workshop for two years with the workshop. The Complainant made numerous representations to company and service centre on phone but Delight Motor Plaza had done nothing except harassment. Complainant sent a legal notice to get repairs the car and claim compensation for the humiliation and deficiency in service.  The Complainant has prayed for directed the Opposite Party to repair or replace damaged parts with new one, to refund the bill of Rs. 12,000/- raised on pretext for repairing, Rs. 1,00,000/- for the damages on account of delay/negligence/deficiency in service, Rs. 2,00,000/- on account of mental agony and harassment and Rs. 50,000/- on account of litigation charges.
2. None has appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party. Hence, Opposite Party have proceeded against Ex-parte vide order dated 14.03.2022.

 

Evidence of the Complainant

3. The Complainant in support of his case filed his affidavit wherein he has supported the assertions made in the complaint.

Arguments and Conclusion

4. We have learned the Counsel for the Complainant. We have also perused the file. The case of the Complainant is that he is the user of the car in question. There was trouble of noise, sudden stop of engine etc. in the said car. The Complainant got the service done of the car on 06.08.2021 in the workshop of the Opposite Party. However, the defects were not rectified. Then after contacting the service advisor of the Opposite Party he took the car again to the workshop of Opposite Party and certain parts were changed of payment of Rs. 1,149/- .Even after that the problems in the car persisted. The Opposite Party did not contest the case and was proceeded against Ex-parte. The Complainant has supported his case by filing his affidavit in evidence. Therefore, under these circumstances, the complaint is allowed. The Opposite Party is directed to pay an amount of Rs. 12,000/- to the Complainant along with interest @ 6% p.a from the date of filing the complaint till recovery. An amount of Rs. 5,000/- shall be paid to the Complainant by the Opposite Party on account of harassment and litigation expenses along with interest @ 6% p.a from the date of this order till recovery.
5. Order announced on 11.11.2022.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)           Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President