Jammu and Kashmir

Jammu

CC/287/2017

NAZIM UD DIN WANI - Complainant(s)

Versus

HYUNDAI MOTORS - Opp.Party(s)

KOUSHAL PARIHAR

10 Feb 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,JAMMU

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

                                                          .

 Case File  No                  190/DFJ           

 Date of  Institution       12/08/2016

 Date of Decision           10/02/2018

 

Nazim Ud Din Wani,

S/O Lt.B.D.Wani,

R/O Shaheedi Chowk,Ext.

Christan Colony,Jammu.

                                                                                                                            Complainant

            V/S

1. Hyundai Motor India Ltd.

 Through its authorized officer

C/O K.C.Jammu Auto Mart Pvt.Ltd.

NH1Narwal By Pass Road,Channi Himmat,

Jammu.

2. K.C..Jammu Auto Mart Pvt.Ltd.

NH1 Narwal Bye Pass Road,

 Channi Himmat, Jammu.

(Authorised Dealer of Hyundai Motor India Ltd.)

Through its business Head.

     

                                                                                                                                            Opposite parties

CORAM

                           Mr.Khalil Choudhar        (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.Koshal Parihar,Advocate,for complainant, present.

 Nemo for OP1.

  Mr.Madan Lal,Advocate for OP2,present.

                                                                ORDER

                                         Grievance of complainant as is discernible from the complaint is that, complainant had purchased the vehicle i20 Sportz 1.2 on 21/12/2010 from OP and got the vehicle registered with Transport Deptt.bearing registration No.JK02AR/6500 and also insured the vehicle from Ops insurance Company, copy of registration certificate and insurance certificate are annexed as Annexures,A & B with the complaint. Complainant further submitted that the vehicle all along was driven by him as he was holding valid and effective driving licence,but during the warranty period the steering of the vehicle started making noise and immediately the complainant intimated OP and also produced the vehicle for removal of defect with the request that since the vehicle is brand new and within the warranty  period and it appears that there is some manufacturing defect in the steering which is causing noise, but the OP after checking the vehicle each and every time assured that the defect has been removed and repaired and no noise will be caused. Allegation of complainant is that after using the vehicle for few days, the same noise use to appear  and the OP on each and every occasion instead of removing the defect permanently used to do temporary repair in the steering of the vehicle and handed over to him, but the complainant when used the vehicle for few days, the same problem persisted and since there was assurance on behalf of Ops that during the warranty period if there develops any defect in the vehicle or in any part of the vehicle, the same will be rectified permanently or the same part will be replaced by new part, but unfortunately in the present case of complainant there was a manufacturing defect in the steering of the vehicle and the Ops intentionally and deliberately, when the complainant during warranty period complained of such defect, the Op instead of removing the defect or replacing the defective part with new one keep on just temporary repair of steering of just curtail the noise of which the complainant was regularly making complaints to OP,since originally the complainant just informed of the noise of the vehicle as it was not certain from where the noise is coming ,but after checkup the Ops themselves informed that the same is coming from the steering and they have rectified the defect in the steering. Complainant further submits that the vehicle in question was purchased by the complainant from Ops with the assurance that during warranty period, if any vehicle develops any defect or if there is any manufacturing defect, the OPs will get the same replaced by new one without charging any cost of defective part, but in the present case the OP despite being informed about the defect of steering  which is causing noise, the OPs during warranty period did not replace the defective part with original one. Complainant further submitted that he has suffered loss and is under great mental set back and depression as the OP has cheated him and are not replacing the defective part which was a manufacturing defect, the Os have committed fraud with him and has adopted unfair trade practice by now charging for removal of defective part of steering of which the complainant is complaining since very inception from the date of purchase of vehicle. Therefore this act of OPs amounts to deficiency in service, as such, complainant prays for replacement of defective part of steering with new one without any charges and handed over the vehicle to him in good condition and in addition also pay compensation under different heads to the tune of Rs.1,20,000/.

                   Notices alongwith copies of complaint were sent to OPs through registered cover,however,despite lapse of statutory period, OPs have not taken any action 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. Perusal of file reveals that the right of OPs to file reply was closed on, 04/10/2016, however,OP2 have filed written version on,18/10/2016,therefore,written version cannot be considered.

.             Complainant adduced evidence by way of duly sworn own affidavit and affidavits of Danish Wani and Gulam Sabar,besides complainant has placed on record copy of certificate of registration, copy of policy schedule, copy of premium receipt, copies of job cards and copy of cover note .

                We have perused case file and heard L/C appearing for parties at length.

               Briefly stated facts of the are that complainant had purchased the vehicle i20 Sportz 1.2 on 21-12-2010 from OP and got the vehicle registered with Transport Deptt.bearing registration No.JK02AR/6500 and also insured the vehicle from Ops insurance Company. Complainant further submitted that the vehicle all along was driven by him as he was holding valid and effective driving licence,but during the warranty period the steering of the vehicle started making noise and immediately the complainant intimated OP and also produced the vehicle for removal of defect with the request that since the vehicle is brand new and within the warranty  period and it appears that there is some manufacturing defect in the steering which is causing noise, but the OP after checking the vehicle each and every time assured that the defect has been removed and repaired and no noise will be caused. Allegation of complainant is that after using the vehicle for few days, the same noise use to appear  and the OP on each and every occasion instead of removing the defect permanently used to do temporary repair in the steering of the vehicle and handed over to him, but the complainant when used the vehicle for few days, the same problem persisted and since there was assurance on behalf of Ops that during the warranty period if there develops any defect in the vehicle or in any part of the vehicle, the same will be rectified permanently or the same part will be replaced by new part, but unfortunately in the present case of complainant there was a manufacturing defect in the steering of the vehicle and the Ops intentionally and deliberately, when the complainant during warranty period complained of such defect, the Op instead of removing the defect or replacing the defective part with new one keep on just temporary repair of steering of just curtail the noise of which the complainant was regularly making complaints to OP,since originally the complainant just informed of the noise of the vehicle as it was not certain from where the noise is coming ,but after checkup the Ops themselves informed that the same is coming from the steering and they have rectified the defect in the steering. Complainant further submits that the vehicle in question was purchased by the complainant from Ops with the assurance that during warranty period, if any vehicle develops any defect or if there is any manufacturing defect, the OPs will get the same replaced by new one without charging any cost of defective part, but in the present case the OP despite being informed about the defect of steering  which is causing noise, the OPs during warranty period did not replace the defective part with original one. Complainant further submitted that he has suffered loss and is under great mental set back and depression as the OP has cheated him and are not replacing the defective part which was a manufacturing defect, the Os have committed fraud with him and has adopted unfair trade practice by now charging for removal of defective part of steering of which the complainant is complaining since very inception from the date of purchase of vehicle.

                            The complainant in his own affidavit and the affidavits of witnesses have supported the averments of the complaint. There is no evidence on record produced by other side to rebut the case of complainant. So from perusal of complaint, documentary and other evidence produced by the complainant, it appears that complainant has succeeded in proving his case as narrated by him in the complaint. The complaint is fully supported by the affidavit of complainant, and affidavits of Danish Wani and Gulam Sabar, respectively, so, in the given circumstances of the case, and in view of the evidence on record, there is no reason to disbelieve the averments of complainant in complaint.

                                   This is a case of deficiency in service. The Ops despite service of notice, sent by the Forum through registered cover have not taken any action to represent the case before this Forum, either to admit the claim of complainant, or to deny it, so there is no reply filed by the Ops in this complaint and there is also no evidence in rebuttal. The present case of the complainant is covered by Section 11 2(b) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1987, which provides that in a case, where the OPs omits or fails to take any action to represent their case within the time given by Forum, in that situation, the Forum shall settle the consumer dispute on the basis of evidence brought to its notice by the complainant. Sub/clause (ii) of the Section 11, clearly provides that even where the OPs omits or fails to taken any action to represent their case before the Forum, the dispute has still to be decided on the basis of evidence brought to its notice by the complainant.

                               Therefore, in view of aforesaid discussion complaint is allowed and complainant is directed to take vehicle to OP1,who shall replace the defective part of the steering with new one without any charges and make the vehicle defect free, to the satisfaction of complainant  within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of vehicle. We further direct OP1 to pay Rs.5000/ as compensation for causing harassment and mental agony to complainant and Rs.5000/ as cost of litigation. The OP1 shall comply the order within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Copy of this order be provided to both the parties as per requirement of the Act. The complaint is accordingly disposed of and file be consigned to records after its due compilation.

Order per President                                                    Khalil Choudhary

                                                                                     (Distt.& Sessions Judge)

Announced                                                                    President

10/02/2018                                                         District Consumer Forum

                                                                                                        Jammu.

Agreed by                                                               

 

Ms.Vijay Angral                                              

 Member    

 

Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chauhan

Member