Punjab

Sangrur

CC/892/2015

Vinod Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Hero Motors Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Shri J.S.Sahni

03 Dec 2015

ORDER

 

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                             

                                                                   Complaint no. 892                                                                                         

                                                                   Instituted on:  25.08.2015

                                                                   Decided on:    03.12.2015

 

Vinod Kumar son of Shri Sat Pal, resident of VPO Khanauri Mandi, Tehsil Moonak, District Sangrur.        

                                                …. Complainant.       

                                         Versus

1.     Hero Motors Limited, 37 KM Stone, Dehli-Jaipur Highway, Gurgaon, through its Managing Director.

2.    M/s New Vikas Automobiles, Narwana Road, Khanauri Mandi, Tehsil Moonak, District Sangrur through its Proprietor/ partner.    

 ….Opposite parties.

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:     Shri J.S.Sahni, Advocate                          

 

FOR THE OPP. PARTIES  :     Exparte.                     

 

Quorum

         

                    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

K.C.Sharma, Member

Sarita Garg, Member

                 

ORDER:   

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Vinod Kumar, complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that he purchased a motorcycle make Hero Splendor  Pro SS  ( Black Colour) from the OP No.2 on 25.04.2015 under  retail invoice number 7439 dated 25.04.2015. At the time of purchase, the OP no.2 gave guarantee/warranty of one year on the said motorcycle.  The complainant followed the  instructions  of the OP No.2 as disclosed by the OP no.2 at the time of purchase.  After 20 days from the purchase of said motorcycle the primer gear of the motorcycle started to give  problem and due to that reason clutch plates of the motorcycle was giving the problem on which the  mechanic of the OP no.2 thoroughly checked  the motorcycle and changed  the primer gear parts and also repaired the clutch bowl  and returned the same to the complainant with an assurance that same will not give any problem in future. Thereafter after ten days, it again started giving problem of noise in the engine on which the OP No.2 again changed the clutch bowl  of the motorcycle.  The complainant  also got one free service  from the OP No.2 and  disclosed the defect in the motorcycle  but the OP No.2 did not issue any job sheet regarding the same.   After some days, the motorcycle again started giving problem in engine and also  of timing chain after which the  complainant again approached the OP No.2 and requested to replace the motorcycle with new one  but  OP No.2  flatly refused to do so. The complainant was called for inspection of the motorcycle  and mechanic of the OP no.2 tried to start the same  but  he failed to do so.  The mechanic of the OP No.2  told that there is manufacturing defect in the engine of the motorcycle and the same is not curable. Thereafter the complainant got checked the motorcycle from mechanic/ expert who after thorough checking told that there is a manufacturing defect which is not repairable. The complainant requested to OPs for replacement of the motorcycle but they did not do so. Thus, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:- 

i)      OPs be directed to replace the defective motorcycle with new one or to refund the purchase price of the said motorcycle i.e. Rs. 50200/- along with interest @18% per annum from the date of purchase till realization and  

ii)     OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.25000/- as compensation   on account of mental agony, harassment and to pay Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses.

2.             After receipt of complaint, notices were sent to the OPs but they did not come present despite service and as such they were proceeded exparte on 26.10.2015.  

3.             In exparte evidence, the complainants have tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-12 and closed evidence.

4.             From the perusal of documents placed on the file and after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant, we find that the complainant had purchased a motorcycle make Hero Splendor Pro SS ( Black Colour) from the OP No.2 on 25.04.2015 under invoice no. 7439 dated 25.04.2015  which is Ex.C-1 on record. The complainant has produced copy of delivery challan Ex.C-3. The complainant’s grievance is that  from the  very beginning of purchase of the motorcycle, it started giving problem  of primer gear  and  clutch plates for which he approached the OP No.2 who changed the  primer gear  parts and  also repaired the  clutch bowl but  soon after passing of ten days, it again started giving problem of noise in the engine then again the OP No.2 changed the clutch bowl.  After some days the  motorcycle again started giving problem of timing chain and also in engine due to which the motorcycle has not started. On asking the OP no.2, the complainant brought his motorcycle in the workshop of the OP No.2 for inspection where the mechanic of the OP No.2  told that there is manufacturing defect in it which is not repairable. To fully prove his case, the complainant has produced report of an expert Mr. Naresh Kumar, proprietor Naresh Autos which is Ex.C-6 on record in which Mr. Naresh Kumar expert stated that complainant  came to him  on 01.08.2015 for checking  of his motorcycle with the problem of not starting and thereafter he thoroughly checked the said motorcycle of the complainant  and as per his knowledge he found that there is manufacturing defect  in the motorcycle set  and due to that reason motorcycle was not started. To corroborate the version of expert, complainant has also produced an affidavit of the expert Ex.C-7 on record.  We feel that the OP No.2 also did not do his crucial duty to redress the grievance of the complainant. All these things fully prove the case of the complainant. Moreover, the OPs have not come forward to contest the case of the complainant rather they chosen to remain exparte. As such, the case of the complainant further has gone unrebutted.

5.             So, in view of the above discussion, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OPs no.1&2, who are jointly and severally liable, to either replace the defective motorcycle  of the complainant with new one of the same model or to pay  price  amount of Rs.50200/- along with interest @9% per annum from the date of complaint till realization subject to return of the defective motorcycle to the OPs. We further order the OPs to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.10000/- as compensation on account of mental pain, agony and harassment and also to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.5500/- as litigation expenses.

6.             This order of ours shall be complied with  within 60 days from the receipt of copy of the order.  Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.                   Announced

                December 3, 2015

 

 

( Sarita Garg)            ( K.C.Sharma)            (Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                      

Member                 Member                           President

 

 

BBS/-