Haryana

Ambala

CC/313/2013

BISHAN SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

HERO MOTO CORP LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

31 May 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

 

                                                                        Complaint case no.  : 313 of 2013

                                                                        Date of Institution    : 28.11.2013

                                                                        Date of decision       : 31.05.2017

 

                        Bishan Singh son of Sh. Banarsi Dass, R/o H.No.838/4, Circular road,                                  Ambala City.

……. Complainant.

 

1. Hero Moto Corp ltd. 34, Community Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi- 110057.
2. M/s Associated Automobiles, Vikas Vihar Shopping Complex, Ambala City.

 

 ….…. Respondents.

 

BEFORE:       SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT

                        SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER             

                        MS ANAMIKA  GUPTA, MEMBER        

 

Present:          Complainant in person.

                        Sh. Kuldeep Kumar, counsel for Ops.

 

ORDER:

                        In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint are that the complainant has purchased the motor cycle bearing Reg. No. HR-1-4677 on 21.11.2012 from the OP No.1 and from very beginning, the vehicle in question started giving problem in its start. Further submitted that the complainant reported the matter to OP NO.1 and he took the vehicle in question to the agency where the vehicle repaired temporarily but they did not disclose the defect of the vehicle to the complainant. Further submitted that after passing three months from temporary repair, the vehicle again started giving trouble and then the complainant told to OP No.1 and 2. Thereafter OPs told to complainant the vehicle in question had battery problem and the same will be changed. On 21.10.2013, there was a same problem in the chain, meter, light self, and the vehicle was not starting and when the complainant told the OP No.1 he again told to bring the vehicle to their workshop and there on checking the mechanic of Ops told that due to non changing the said items, the Engine of the said vehicle is giving all these problems and if this time the battery is not changed, the total engine shall become defective. Further submitted that the complainant told the Ops to put the new battery in his vehicle to avoid any further damage to his vehicle, but both the addressee did not care for the vehicle of the complainant, rather told him that the battery is ok and in case there is any problem in the battery, they shall be responsible for the damages caused to the vehicle of the complainant and OP NO.1 charges a sum of Rs. lump sum Rs.2000/- as repair charges. Further submitted that the complainant has been requesting the OP to do the needful in his vehicle, but they are putting complainant off on one pretext or the other and have failed to remove the defect from the vehicle and finally the complainant himself purchased new battery for the said vehicle for the proper smooth running of vehicle. But after replacing the said items of the said vehicle, the vehicle still not running smoothly and giving trouble to the complainant. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                     Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed written statement submitting that there it is wrong that after the purchase of the motorcycle it started giving trouble in running and there is a manufacturing defect in the vehicle. Further submitted that the complainant has not availed first free service which was due on the running of 500 K.M. to 750 K.M. of the vehicle. Further submitted that the complainant for second free service on 20.12.2012 after running the vehicle to 1500 K.M. head lamp was forced to the satisfaction of the complainant. On third free service the complaint came on 20.02.2013 with the complaint that the vehicle is not giving proper mileage per liter. The average is checked and no defect was found. On fourth free service the complaint came on 20.06.2013 and reported noise in the chain and chain was slightly loosed. Thereafter, the complainant had not come for free service by producing the necessary coupon/copy and he came on 27.07.2013 for paid service and there was no defect in the vehicle purchased by the complainant.

3                      To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure C-X C-Y along with documents as annexure C-1 to C-5 and close his evidence. On the other hand, counsel for the Ops has also tendered affidavit as Annexure R-X alongwith documents as Annexure R-1 to R-4 and close his evidence.

4.                     The grievance of the complainant is that the complainant had purchased a motor cycle bearing Reg. No. HR-1-4677 on 21.11.2012 from the OP No.1 and from very beginning, the vehicle in question is started giving problem in its startup, problem in chain, meter, light self. To prove his version, the complainant has placed on record copy of Sale Certificate as Annexure C-1, Temporary Certificate of Registration Annexure               C-2, Form 22 Annexure C-3, copy of bill dated 21.10.2013 as Annexure C-4 and Annexure C-5.

                        On the other hand, counsel for OPs argued that the complainant has not availed first free service which was due on the running of 500 k.m. to 750 km. Counsel for the Ops has further argued that there is no manufacture defect in the vehicle in question and to prove this fact, he has placed on record Free Service Job Card as Annexure R-1 to R-4 in which no manufacture defect has been shown. Counsel for the complainant has tendered a statement on 18.05.2017 in which they are ready to repair the motorcycle in question without labour charges being a goodwill gesture and if any part/material will replace in the vehicle then the complainant will pay the cost of the same.

5.                     We have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the case file. In the present case, the complainant failed to file any application under Section 13(1)(c) of C.P. Act to this Forum which is relevant to verify the manufacture defect nor he filed any report of private expert to prove the vehicle in question is having any manufacture defect or any other problems like chain meter, light self and the vehicle was not starting.

6.                     In view of above statement of counsel for the Ops and in the interest of justice, the present complaint is disposed off with direction to OP that they will repair the vehicle in question without any laboure charges and if any part/material will replace in the vehicle then the complainant will pay the cost of the same. Copies of the order be sent of parties concerned as per rule. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced on : 31.05.2017                                          

                                                                                                         Sd/-

                                                                                                  (D.N. ARORA)

                                                                                                          President

 

                                           Sd/-

                            (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                                          Member

 

                                                                                                             Sd/-

                                                                                               (ANAMIKA  GUPTA)

                                                                                                         MEMBER