Jammu and Kashmir

Jammu

CC/688/2017

LALIT KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

HIGH TECH MOTORS - Opp.Party(s)

RP SANGAR

19 May 2018

ORDER

 DISTRICT    CONSUMER     DISPUTES   REDRESSAL  FORUM, JAMMU

                (Constituted under J&K Consumer Protection Act,1987)

                                                         

 Case File  No                235/DFJ         

 Date of  Institution     26-09-2017

 Date of Decision      :    15-05-2018

 

Lalit Kumar,

S/O Sh.Amar Chand,

R/O Shanti  Nagar,Udeywala,

Jammu.

                                                                                                                    Complainant

               V/S

1.High Tech Motors,

 Chand Nagar,Near Hotel Rivera Fortune,

Jammu.

2.M/S Bazaz Electricals Ltd.

45/47 Veer Nariman Road,Mumbai-400001.

                                                                                                                                    Opposite parties

        CORAM

                  Khalil Choudhary    (Distt.& Sessions Judge)  President

                  Ms.Vijay Angral                                                      Member

                  Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chauhan                                Member.

 

In the matter of: Complaint under section 10 of J&K Consumer

                              Protection Act 1987.

 

Mr.R.P.Sangra,Advocate for complainant, present.

 Mr.Amit Sharma Advocate for OP2,present.

 

                                                            ORDER

               Facts relevant for the disposal of complaint on hand are that the complainant purchased a generator of Bazaz Electrical Company through its outlet agent at below Gumat Area,namely,Gupta Scooters,on,24-07-2014 for a sale consideration of Rs.78,000/-,but the said generator marred by defects from the very beginning .According to complainant he took the said generator to Gupta Scooters for removing the defect/fault, thereafter Gupta Scooter was shifted to Chand Nagar and started its business in the name and style of “High  Tech Motors Chand Nagar Jammu near Hotel  Rivera Fortune, Jammu, he took the generator set from his residence at Udheywala to Chand Nagar again in a load carrier who charged Rs.1000/-for to and fro journey and checked by OP who told that generator set engine has been jammed and for that new spare parts has to be collected from Puna Bazaz Company and the replacement of new part was done for which OP charged Rs.14,500/-as repair charges. Allegation of complainant is that again after 3 to 4 days, the generator broke down and became non-functional, he again took the generator set to OP1 ,who told that motor of generator has broke down  and it is to be repaired at Company Workshop at Delhi Company of Bajaj and for that purpose Rs.5500/- was charged besides Rs.1000/-as carrier charges. Allegation of complainant is that he repeatedly approached Ops for replacement of generator set, as it was marred by mechanical defect, but Ops paid no heed to his requests. Constrained by the act of Ops complainant served legal notice upon OPs,but nothing was done by Ops and this act of Ops constitutes deficiency in service. Therefore, complainant seeks direction to Ops either for replacement of generator set or refund of cost of generator set to the tune of Rs.78,000/-plus  other charges incurred .

                       Notices were sent to the OPs alongwith copies of complaint through registered covers with acknowledgment due and as per record the notices were received by the Ops, but they did not choose to represent their case in this Forum, either to admit the claim of complainant or to deny the same within stipulated period provided under the Act, so their right to file written version was closed.Howeve,Mr.Amit Sharma Advocate appeared on behalf of OP2 and filed vakalatnama.

            The complainant adduced evidence by way of duly sworn his own affidavit and affidavit of Jasbir Jassi.

                 We have perused the case file and also heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

              Briefly stated case of complainant is that he purchased a generator of Bazaz Electrical Company through its outlet agent at below Gumat Area,namely,Gupta Scooters,on,24-07-2014 for a sale consideration of Rs.78,000/-,but the said generator marred by defects from the very beginning .According to complainant he took the said generator to Gupta Scooters for removing the defect/fault, thereafter Gupta Scooter was shifted to Chand Nagar and started its business in the name and style of High  Tech MotorsChand Nagar Jammu near Hotel  Rivera Fortune, Jammu, he took the generator set from his residence at Udheywala to Chand Nagar again in a load carrier who charged Rs.1000/-for to and fro journey and checked by OP who told that generator set engine has been jammed and for that new spare parts has to be collected from Puna Bazaz Company and the replacement of new part was done for which OP charged Rs.14,500/-as repair charges. Allegation of complainant is that again after 3 to 4 days, the generator broke down and became non-functional, he again took the generator set to OP1, who told that motor of generator has broke down and it is to be repaired at Company Workshop at Delhi Company of Bajaj and for that purpose Rs.5500/- was charged besides Rs.1000/-as carrier charges. Allegation of complainant is that he repeatedly approached Ops for replacement of generator set, as it was marred by mechanical defect, but Ops paid no heed to his requests.

                           In order to substantiate his allegations complainant filed his own duly sworn evidence affidavit and affidavit of Jasbir Jassi.Complainant,as well as, his witness again repeated the contents of complaint ,therefore, same need no reiteration.

                Be it noted that complainant did not support his allegations by any documentary evidence, so much so, complainant failed to produce the bill, from whom he had purchased generator set. It has also been revealed from the complaint that complainant has also not placed on record job card, from where it is shown that when he has repaired the generator set on payment. There is absolutely no evidence available on the file to show that complainant has purchased generator set from OPs. It was incumbent upon the complainant to produce proper bill. Moreover complainant also failed to produce job card.

                 The burden to prove that complainant had purchased generator set from OPs was on complainant, but he failed to discharge the  initial onus, therefore, question of deficiency in service do not arise,resultantly,we are of the opinion that in view of failure of complainant to substantiate his allegations, renders the complaint perfunctnary and  tall tale story, unworthy of reliance.

                  Therefore, we are of the opinion that complainant has failed to prove his case against the Ops, therefore, proceedings are not initiated in terms of law.

                  

                        In afore quoted back drop, complaint fails, accordingly, same is dismissed.However,in the facts and circumstances of the matter, parties are left to bear their own costs. File after its due compilation be consigned to records.

Order per President                                   Khalil Choudhary

                                                                (Distt.& Sessions Judge)

Announced                                                     President

15-05-2018                                           District Consumer Forum

Agreed by                                                      Jammu.

                                                             

  Ms.Vijay Angral          

  Member                                                                                              

.               

 Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chauhan

Member