Haryana

Kurukshetra

CC/295/2019

Balbir Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Honda Cars - Opp.Party(s)

K.K.Sirsla

21 May 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISISON, KURUKSHETRA

Complaint No.295 of 2019

Date of institution: 23.07.2019

                                      Date of decision: 21.05.2024

 

Balbir Singh son of Shri Mangal Singh, resident of H.No. 378, Sector-7, Urban Estate, Kurukshetra.

                                                                …Complainant.

 

1.     Honda Cars India Ltd., Plot No. A-1, Sector-40/41, Surajpur, Kasna Road, Greater Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar-Uttar Pradesh-201306 through its Managing Director.

2.     Kishiv Motors Pvt. Ltd., Elegant Honda Kurukshetra, near Umri Chowk,NH-1, G.T. Road, Kurukshetra through its proprietor/Incharge.

Versus

 

…Opposite parties.

 

CORAM:    DR. NEELIMA SHANGLA, PRESIDENT.

NEELAM, MEMBER.

RAMESH KUMAR, MEMBER.

 

Present:   Shri K.I. Sirsla, Advocate for the complainant.

                Shri Amit Sharma, Advocate for the OP No.1.

                Shri Mohit Tayal, Advocate for the OP No.2.

                 

 

Order:     

                This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

2.             Briefly stated, it is the case of the complainant that being advertised by the OPs, on 01.02.2016, the complainant purchased Car Honda City, Model Type City  1.5VX(O) MT (i-DTEC), for Rs.12,01,801/- being registration No. HR07W-0440.  The Ops had also fixed the GPS Navigation system in the aforesaid car and charged Rs.50,000/- from the complainant separately from the above sale price and the warranty scheme valid up 4th year warranty No. SER-EW-DD206-1516-16 and the OP No.2 also received Rs.40,068/- for insurance Bumper and Rs.5500/- received for Log+temporary number and Rs.2999/- for H.Connect and Rs.4690/- for road side assistant, Rs. 12023/- for extended warranty.  The complainant further averred that from the beginning, the Navigation system and Music Touch System were defective and therefore, the complainant requested the Ops regarding the said problem and requested to replace or to make payment the said items, but OPs are further harassed the complainant by not paying the said amount to the complainant in spite of repeated requests of the complainant   Thereafter, A legal notice dated 07.05.2019 has been served upon the OPs, but it did not any fruitful result.  Hence this complaint.

3.             Upon receipt of notice, Shri Amit  Shram, Advocate appeared and filed its written statement.  In the said written, while taking the preliminary objections with respect  to the cause of action, locus standi, and maintainability etc. controverted all the material assertion of the complainant and contended specifically by pleading  inter-alia that the complainant has himself admitted that the he purchased the aforesaid car for Rs.12,01,801/- on 01.02.2016.  He further contended that a bare reading of Section 24-A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 makes it crystal clear that a consumer complaint has to filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen as he has sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within the prescribed period and the concerned forum record reason for condoning the delay. The OP No. 1 further contended that the present complaint has been filed within two years from the date of accrual of cause of action.

4.             The OP No.2 in its written statement contended that no liability being the car out of extended warranty and the matter in question regarding the question of GPS system and Music System are not covered as per terms and conditions so given by OP No.1 and even if the complainant intends to have any relief from the Op No.2 then he may visit n the workshop and to meet Mr. Sanjeev Aggarwal-Service Manager, so that if there is any petty cost; then it can be set-right, but the complainant is not agreed to it nor he has allowed to check and carry out the job hence no case is made out in favour of the complainant and against the OP No.2.

5.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex. CW1/A and documents EX.C1 to Ex.C-8 and closed the evidence on 21.01.2021 by suffering separate statement. The learned counsel for the OP No.1has tendered the affidavit Ex. RW2/A and documents Ex. R1/2 and closed the same on 04.04.2022 while the learned counsel for the OP No.1 tendered affidavit Ex. RW1/A and closed the same on 11.11.2021.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel for complainant and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

7.             Shri K.S. Sirsala, counsel of the complainant argued that  on 01.02.2016, the complainant purchased Car Honda City, Model Type City  1.5VX(O) MT (i-DTEC), for Rs.12,01,801/- being registration No. HR07W-0440.  The Ops had also fixed the GPS Navigation system in the aforesaid car and charged Rs.50,000/- from the complainant separately from the above sale price and the warranty scheme valid up 4th year warranty No. SER-EW-DD206-1516-16 and the OP No.2 also received Rs.40,068/- for insurance Bumper and Rs.5500/- received for Log+temporary number and Rs.2999/- for H.Connect and Rs.4690/- for road side assistant, Rs. 12023/- for extended warranty.  The counsel of the complainant further argued that from the beginning, the Navigation system and Music Touch System were defective and therefore, the complainant requested the Ops regarding the said problem and requested to replace or to make payment the said items, but OPs are further harassed the complainant by not paying the said amount to the complainant in spite of repeated requests of the complainant .

8.             Shri Mohit Tayal, Advocate for the OP No.2 has argued that he represents the dealer and dealer is responsible for any defect  of car which was manufactured by the OP No.1.  Shri K.I. Sirsala, Advocate for the complainant has argued that the warranty period is initially 2 years and thereafter it was extended for 4 years.  Hence, the music system and navigation system was  within warranty period of 4 years and therefore, the OP No.1 i.e. the Manufacturer Honda Car purchased by the complainant are responsible.  OP No. 1 is directed to pay Rs.50,000/- along with 9% penal interest within 45 days from today.  OP No.1 is further directed to pay Rs. 50,000/- as damages for harassment and mental torture and for deficiency in service to the complainant. The complaint is accepted with costs which is assessed Rs.11,000/-.

9.             In default of compliance of this order, proceedings shall be initiated under Section 72 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as non-compliance of court order shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one month, but which may extend to three years, or with fine, which shall not be less than twenty five thousand rupees, but which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.     

Announced in open Commission:

Dated:21.05.2024

                                                                (Dr. Neelima Shangla)            

                                                                President,

                                                                DCDRC, Kurukshetra.

 

(Neelam)                (Ramesh Kumar)

Member                   Member