Delhi

East Delhi

CC/418/2013

VIJENDER SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

HONDA SIEL CARS. - Opp.Party(s)

23 Jan 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

C.C. NO.  418/13

 

Dr. Vijendra Singh / Mehndiyan,

S/o Late Shri Y.P. Singh

R/o F-41, LGF, Lajpat Nagar-II

New Delhi – 110 024                                                    ….Complainant

Vs.

1. Honda Siel Cars India Ltd.

Plot No. A-1, Sector – 40/41

Surajpur-Kasana Road

Greater Noida Industrial Development Ara

Distt. Gautam Budh Nagar, UP

 

2. Prime Honda.

General Manager Sales

Plot No. 1, Patparganj Industrial Complex

Near Mother Dairy, New Delhi                                          …Opponents

 

Date of Institution: 20.05.2013

Judgement Reserved on : 23.01.2018

Judgement Passed on: 24.01.2018

 

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By: Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

 

JUDGEMENT

            This complaint has been filed by Dr. Vijendra Singh against Honda Siel Cars India Ltd. (OP-1) and Prime Honda (OP-2), under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with allegations of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. 

2.         The facts in brief are that the complainant purchased a Car City V Honda on 11.11.2012 vide invoice no. 001001/2012-2013 dated 31.11.2012 for an amount of Rs. 8,55,917/- whereas Rs. 67,566/- was paid as registration charges, Rs. 5,000/- was charged for additional accessories e.g. sensor, car cover and pillow and Rs. 50,201/- was paid for CNG sequential kit with cylinder and Rs. 3,371/- was charged additionally on account of CNG fitment charges from respondent.  They introduced a new version of Honda City Car with CNG mode in the month of October 2012 which was purchased by the complainant.  He was assured that filling point for CNG shall be used in the same cavity where the filling point for petrol stands.  Since the new version of the said car was not readily available for inspection, the complainant believed the respondent and booked the car.

            It has been stated that since the date of purchase, the said car was having manufacturing defects as: (i) the fuel gage needle indicates nil when the vehicle stands switched to CNG mode of the fuel consumption and     (ii) the low fuel warning indicator continuously glows just after starting the engine of vehicle above said.

            The complainant contacted OP-2 and he was assured for rectification.  He continued to point out the problems/deficiencies, but nothing was done.  He sent an email dated 06.12.2012 raising his grievances.  he also wrote a letter dated 18.12.2012 point out the defects in the car as: (i) the fuel gage indicating pointer comes to zero when the CNG mode takes over (ii) the fuel warning yellow light continuously glows when the vehicle driven in CNG mode (iii) the speed gage indicator shows the average mileage for petrol made only and not for CNG mode (iv) the filling point for CNG is not in the cavity where the filling point for petrol is provided whereas it was proposed as such (v) the mileage is low on CNG as well as petrol and (vi) the cylinder never gets filled up more than 9 kg each time. 

            He received a letter no. HCIL/CR/12-13/034 dated 22.12.2012 whereby OP-1 has tried to justify about the defects of the car as complained.  He again wrote a letter of dated 03.01.2013 point out the defects; however, nothing was done by OPs.  Thus, he has stated that this amounts to deficiency of service as well as negligence on the part of OPs.  He has prayed for refund of cost of Honda City car amounting to              Rs. 9,82,055/-; Rs. 5,00,000/- compensation on account of sufferings and physical agony and Rs. 50,000/- as litigation cost.

3.         In reply of Honda Siel Cars India Ltd. (OP-1), they have stated that the complaint was based upon false assertions; the defects pointed out by the complainant had been properly explained and the complainant was requested for further road tests; the complainant at the time of purchase of the vehicle was aware CNG was not an OE fitment by the manufacturer, but was fitted as an additional kit as per customer demand.  In the owner manual/FAQ, it has been specified that Honda City 1.5 VMT modified variant specifications have been modified for engine and suspension to suitable adaptation for CNG technology to optimize engine performance and comfort.  The fuel gage for petrol in such a system comes to zero when the CNG mode is switched on as it was the CNG on which the vehicle runs at the given time. 

            It was further stated that petrol warning indication was displayed as the fuel rail was cut off when the gas operation takes place.  Thus, it has been stated that the vehicle was not at all defective in any respect.  The complaint was without any cause of action.  They have denied other facts. 

            In reply of Prime Honda (OP-2), they have stated that the complainant have alleged manufacturing defect, but have failed to prove the same; they have only authorized dealers and there was no negligence or unfair trade practice or deficiency on the part of OP-2.  They have denied the other facts also.                

4.         The complainant has filed rejoinder to the WS of OPs, wherein he has controverted the pleas taken in the WS and reasserted his pleas. 

5.         In support of its complaint, the complainant have examined himself.  He has deposed on affidavit.  He has narrated the facts which have been stated in the complaint.  He has also got exhibited documents such as plaint filed by him (Ex.CW-1/A), copies of invoices (Ex.CW-1/B to 1/F), copy of email dated 06.12.2012 (Ex.CW-1/G), copy of letter dated 18.12.2012 (Ex.CW-1/H), copy of letter dated 22.12.2012 (Ex.CW-1/I), copy of letter dated 03.01.2013 alongwith postal receipts (Ex.CW-1/J), copy of literature published by respondent (Ex.CW-1/K) and copy of receipt dated 10.11.2012 (Ex.CW-1/L colly.).   

            In defence, Honda Siel Cars India Ltd. (OP-1) have examined        Shri Amit Sinha, Manager (Legal) who have deposed on affidavit.  He has narrated the facts which have been stated in the WS.

            M/s. Prime Honda (Capital Cars Pvt. Ltd.) (OP-2) have examined Shri Kamal Manchanda, who have also deposed on affidavit.  He has also narrated the facts which have been stated in the WS.  He has also got exhibited documents such as copy of letter dated 22.12.2012 (Ex.RW1/1). 

6.         We have heard Ld. Counsel for OP-1 and OP-2 only as the complainant did not appear to argue.  From perusal of the evidence on record, it is noticed that the complainant have pointed out the functioning of the CNG mode which have also been explained by M/s. Honda Siel Cars (OP-1).  The fact that the contents of the complaint as well as the evidence on record only point out the mode of functioning of the vehicle on CNG mode which have been explained by OP-1, it cannot be said that this amounts to manufacturing defect.  Therefore, the complainant have failed to point out any deficiency on the part of OP-1 as well as OP-2.  That being so, the complaint of the complainant fails, which deserve its dismissal and the same is dismissed.  There is no order as to cost.

            Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

            File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                              (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

Member                                                                                Member    

 

            (SUKHDEV SINGH)

             President