Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/799/2015

Dr. Shikha Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

Hyundai Motor India Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Puneet Sharma

11 May 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/799/2015
Date of Institution	:	02/12/2015
Date of Decision	:	11/05/2018

Dr. Shikha Gupta w/o Dr. Sumeet Rajpal resident of House No.846, Sector 7, Panchkula (Haryana).

… Complainant

V E R S U S

1.     Hyundai Motor India Ltd., DLF Tower-B, 3^rd Floor, Rajiv Gandhi Technology Park, Manimajra, Chandigarh through its Regional Manager.

2.     Hyundai Motor India Ltd., 2^nd, 5^th & 6^th Floor, Corporate One (Baani Building), Plot No.5, Commercial Centre, Jasola, New Delhi through its Managing Director.

3.     Berkeley Hyundai (Berk Auto LLP) Plot No.375, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Panchkula through its General Manager.

4.     Berkeley Hyundai (Berk Auto LLP) Plot No.27, Industrial Area, Phase I, Chandigarh, 160002 through its Manager. 

… Opposite Parties

CORAM :	SHRI RATTAN SINGH THAKUR	PRESIDENT
	MRS. SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER

                                                                     

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Puneet Sharma, Counsel for complainant
	:	Ms. Parminder Kaur, Counsel for OPs 1 & 2
	:	Sh. Sandeep Jasuja, Counsel for OPs 3 & 4.

 

Per Rattan Singh Thakur, President

1.         Allegations, in brief, are, on 17.8.2014, complainant had purchased a Hyundai i-20 Elite Asta Car Petrol (top model) from OPs on payment of Rs.7.50 lakhs. Later on, the vehicle was registered.  After driving the vehicle for approximately 1100 kms. the complainant got the first service done on 23.9.2014. On the very next day, the complainant noticed some noise from the car while driving, but, the service advisor of the OPs, after taking test drive, assured noise is normal and will die out naturally.  Thereafter, the matter was reported on 6.10.2014 to OP-3 and it was assured, sound is not unusual but normal and will abate automatically.  However, problem still persisted and after driving a distance of 100 kms. has aggravated. Time and again, it was got checked and the gear box was also replaced. However, even after change, problem still persisted.  Alleged, there has been deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence, the present consumer complaint praying for replacement of the car in question with a new one or to refund the price thereof alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses.
2.         OPs 1 & 2 filed their joint written reply and, inter alia raised preliminary objections of complaint being frivolous and there is no manufacturing defect.  On merits, it was claimed vehicle did not suffer from any abnormal noise from the very beginning. Gear noise was checked and it was found okay.  Some parts were also replaced.  The complaint is frivolous and vexatious. Hence, on these lines, the cause is sought to be defended.
3.         OPs 3 & 4 in their separate written reply also raised similar pleas as of OPs 1 & 2. Averred, under the warranty conditions, complainant is entitled to replacement of defective parts of the vehicle.  OPs replaced the defective parts as and when the defect in any part came to light.  Denied, there is any defect much less inherent manufacturing defect in the vehicle
4.         Parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
5.         We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and gone through the record of the case.  After appraisal of record, our findings are as under:-
6.         Per pleadings, purchase of the vehicle against the consideration of Rs.7.50 lakhs is not in dispute.  It is also the case, noise which started after the first free service, was brought to the notice of the OPs.  To this effect, there is Annexure R-1 dated 20.7.2015.  Not only this, there is Annexure R-2/1 dated 5.12.2014 which shows, technical team wanted to work on the car for one hour. Again there is Annexure R-2/2 dated 5.12.2014 which shows, noise problem was reported, but, the customer did not hand over the car to the technical team. This sort of evidence by the OPs sums up the version that there has been continuous problem of noise in the vehicle, which could not be corrected despite repair/ replacement of the gear box etc.  Hence, the present consumer complaint was filed. 
7.         A perusal of the record shows, on request this Forum had appointed team of technical experts from PEC University of Technology, Chandigarh. Their report dated 13.6.2016 is on record and the concluding paragraph of the same is reproduced as under :-

        “During inspection and test drive it has been observed that an unusual sound is coming from the engine/gear box of the vehicle while driving at low speed.  The committee is of the opinion that the sound coming from the engine/gear box of the vehicle is undesirable and since it could not be rectified even after the replacement of gear box, the problem is attributed to some inherent manufacturing defect in the vehicle.”

This report has been submitted by Dr. V.P. Singh, Professor, Mechanical Engineering Deptt., PEC University of Technology, Chandigarh, Dr. Sushant Samir, Associate Professor and Sh. Gopal Dass, W.I.  They are experts in the subject and the committee in one voice had opined that sound coming from the engine/gear box of the vehicle is undesirable and since it could not be rectified even after the replacement of the gear box, problem is attributed to some inherent manufacturing defect in the vehicle.  The report of experts has endorsed the suffering of Dr. Shikha Gupta, complainant on point of persistent problem which is not rectifiable.  Even this problem had occurred during the warranty period.  The complainant had bought the vehicle in question after paying handsome amount of Rs.7.50 lakhs. Why should she retain this defective vehicle after paying such a hefty amount?  It was not replaced by the OPs.  Even they had also wanted to get it checked from their engineers.  The report is of Professor/ Associate Professor/W.I. from the PEC University of Technology, Chandigarh i.e. a Government aided University and is an autonomous body.  Their impartiality can hardly be doubted and there is no record that they have misconducted in the inspection of the vehicle and have given partisan report.

8.         Non-association or non-joining in the vehicle inspection by the OPs does not carry much weight as they could have been silent spectators there and the inspection was to be done by the technical experts of the government body.  Thus, the affidavit furnished by the complainant carries much weight and in this situation the report of technical experts is decisive one.  Per this record, we hold that it is a case of unfair trade practice as the vehicle was not replaced despite complaints of incurable defects. 
9.         In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint deserves to succeed and the same is accordingly partly allowed. The OPs are directed as under:-

1. To immediately replace the defective vehicle of the complainant with a new  one within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the defective one from the complainant, failing which the OPs shall refund the invoice value of the car in question i.e. Rs.7.50 lakhs to the complainant. However, on this amount no interest is granted as the vehicle is being used by the complainant and it was orally apprised that it has already covered a distance of 25000 kms.
2. To pay Rs.50,000/- to the complainant as compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and harassment caused to her;
3. To pay to the complainant Rs.15,000/- as costs of litigation.

10.         This order be complied with by the OPs within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
11.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-
11/05/2018	[Surjeet Kaur]	[Rattan Singh Thakur]
hg	Member	President