O R D E R
By Smt.Sreeja.S, Member :
The complainant is a steel fabrication worker. His regular course of business is in Thrisur, Ernakulam and Palakkad Districts. The 1st Opposite Party is the manufacturer of Honda Motorcycle and Scooters and its General Manager is the 2nd opposite party. The 3rd opposite party is the Manager of Srivari service center. The complainant purchased a CBF 150 MA 7 I.D.C.B. Unicorn Motorcycle as per the invoice No.VSI 3044 dated 1/2/2012 for Rs.64,477/- from the 3rd opposite party. At the time of purchasing the vehicle opposite parties issued a warranty card to the complainant. Immediately after getting delivery of the vehicle the complainant noticed the following defects of the vehicle: 1.The swaying of the vehicle, 2.Jerking of the vehicle, 3.Chain complaint, 4.Water entering to the meter and indicator due to leakage, 5.Loose of seat. Due to the above defects, the complainant could not use the vehicle properly and continuously. Hence complainant informed about the defects to opposite party No.3 on 6/2/2012. 3rd opposite party in reply told to the complainant that, as and when the engineer of the 1st opposite party arrives he will inform the complainant to get it connected. In spite of repeated enquiry made by the complainant the 2nd opposite party neither informed the arrival of the engineer nor gave a definite answer to the disputed matter. They were also not amenable to act according to the warranty agreement. On account of the defects noted above, the complainant was prevented from attending to the work sites continuously and regularly. The complainant had to travel by bus and hire autoriksha for visiting his work sites. After repeated phone calls to the 3rd OP on one or two occasions the 3rd OP contacted the complainant over phone and demanded to produce the vehicle in the service center associated to the show room of 3rd OP. The complainant produced the vehicle in the show room and waited there for hours. The opposite party did not repair the vehicle or gave a satisfactory reply regarding the defects of the vehicle. Since there was no other option left, the complainant caused a lawyer notice dated 22/10/2012 to 2nd and 3rd opposite parties. After receipt of the notice the 3rd opposite party send reply dated 3/1/2012 directing the complainant to produce the vehicle in the showroom of the opposite parties. Moreover, to the surprise of the complainant the 3rd opposite party has also alleged that in spite of repeated requests made by the 3rd opposite party over phone the complainant has not produced the vehicle in the serviced center. The allegation in the reply notice is not true. The complainant was ready and willing to produce the vehicle as and when asked. Since to find a finality for the matter, on 8/11/2012 the complainant took the vehicle to the service centre and waited for two hours. Still nobody took the vehicle for inspection and hence after raising his protest, he returned back. The act of the opposite parties amounts to the unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. The opposite parties unscrupulously violated the warranty agreement. Opposite parties has been caused mental pain, sufferings and monetary loss. Hence this complaint.
2.All the opposite parties appeared through the counsel before the Commission and filed version. The details of version are as follows: The complainant has purchased the said motor cycle from this opposite parties. There are four free maintenance services for the vehicle at the stipulated intervals which is specifically mentioned in the service manual of the vehicle. The complainant has produced the vehicle for those services except for the second one. All those occasions this opposite party has done the services with utmost care and cured the defects which are pointed out by the complainant at the time of service. The vehicle had a warranty of two years or 32000km, whichever is earlier. The complaints with the vehicle which are mentioned in the para 4 of this complaint are not serious one and all those complaints could be cured in the service station. Moreover on 6/2/2012 or any other date, the complainant never approached this opposite parties. The opposite parties are always ready to cure any defects of their products for free in the warranty period or for cost when the warranty period is over. The 3rd opposite party made all the efforts to contact the complainant to produce the vehicle for inspection and to clear the defects, if any. The 3rd opposite party sent three notices son 3/11/12, 30/11/12 and on 17/12/12 but after receiving these notices, he never turned up or produced the vehicle with its complaints before the opposite parties and prayed for dismissal.
3.Points for consideration are :
1)Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
2)If so reliefs and costs
4.Complainant filed proof affidavit and produced 7 documents, marked as Exts.P1 to P7. Opposite parties filed counter proof affidavit and produced 12 documents , marked as Exts.R1 to R12. Commission report is marked as Exts.C1.
5.Point No.1: Complainant purchased a Unicorn motor cycle is admitted by the opposite parties. It is also proved by Exts.P1 and P2. The case of the complainant is that certain defects to the vehicle were not attended to by the opposite parties which adversely affected his work causing high monetary loss and mental agony. Several time he produced the vehicle before the opposite party to get it repaired and all such demands failed due to the unwelcoming attitude of opposite parties. The opposite parties denied all those things and they pleads that they are ready to cure the defect of their products for free in the warrant period or for cost when the warranty is over. They also do not have a case that the warranty period of the product is over. Especially when the complainant has a definite case of warranty existing to the product.
6.Now the expert commissioner has been appointed and he filed Ext.C1 report. On test riding, the commissioner found that there was uneasiness due to shake in the handle bar and bend on the handle bar. There is a sound from the handle assembly. The shake and sound reported to be in the front cone set. To cure this defect the commissioner found that the front cone set and handle bar shall be replaced. Odometer was also not working. Time and again Hon’ble apex court as well as the National Commission has held that in this sort of cases expert report carries due weightage. The Expert, through Ext.C1, reported the defects of the vehicle as stated above. Exts.R2 and R5 also states the cone set repair and seat loose work which clearly corroborates with the allegations and Ext.C1 report.
7.Exts.R6, R8 to R10 and R12 are respective notices sent to the complainant. Some of them are returned back. The complainant has no contra evidence against these documents. Hence it can be seen that they bonafidely taken steps to attend the concern of the complainant. Hence this Commission finds that this is not a fit case to consider the prayer of compensation.
8.From the above discussion this Commission finds that Ext.C1 report proves the case of the complainant to that extent as stated therein. Moreover, the opposite parties ready to provide service to the vehicle free of cost. Hence it is just and proper to direct the opposite parties to replace the parts as reported in Ext.C1.
9.In the result complaint is partially allowed and hereby direct the 1st to 3rd opposite parties to replace the front cone set and handle bar of KL8AW6461 Honda Unicorn bike within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is also directed to pay cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only), failing in which same would carry an interest of 6% p.a. till realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Commission this the 21st day of June 2021.
Sd/- Sd/-
Sreeja.S C.T.Sabu
Member President
Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits
Ext.P1 Bill dtd.1/2/12, Ext.P2 Bill dtd.2/2/12, Ext.P3 Copy of lawyer notice, Ext.P4 series Postal receipts, Ext.P5A/D card, Ext.P6 Letter dt. 3/11/12, Ext.P7 Owner’s Manual
Ext.C1 – Commission Report
Opposite Parties Exhibits
Ext.R1 Job Card dt.27/2/12, Ext.R2 Job card dt.11/5/12, Ext.R3 Job card dt.15/6/12, Ext.R4 Job card dt.30/7/12, Ext.R5 Job card dt.10/9/12, Ext.R6 Copy of letter dt.3/11/12, Ext.R7 A/D card, Ext.R8 Copy of letter dt.30/11/12, Ext.R9 Undelivered letter, Ex.R10 Copy of letter dt.17/12/12, Ext.R11 Postal receipt , Ext.R12 Undelivered letter.
Id/-
Member
