Delhi

North East

CC/200/2017

Chander pal - Complainant(s)

Versus

J.S Autumobiles - Opp.Party(s)

16 Feb 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No.200/17

 

In the matter of:

 

	Sh. Chanderpal, S/o Shri. Kailash Chand, R/o F-1/340 Sundar Nagri, Delhi-110093	Complainant
	Versus
	J.S Automobiles F-13, Chand Bagh, Delhi-110094	Opposite Party

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:        JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                     DATE OF ORDER      :

19.07.2017 11.01.2023 16.02.2023

 

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

 

 

ORDER

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer protection Act, 1986.

 

Case of the Complainant

1. The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that on 03.06.2017, the Complainant had given his Bajaj Auto-Rickshaw bearing registration no. DL 1RN 9723 to the Opposite Party for repairing and Opposite Party handed over a repair estimate bill of Rs. 83,000/- to the Complainant. When the Complainant enquired about the huge amount of aforesaid repair estimate bill, then the representative of the Opposite Party told that they had added the charges of new chassis and new body in the aforesaid estimated bill and assurance was given by the Opposite Party that they would fix a new chassis and new body in the said auto rickshaw. On 16.06.2017, when the Complainant along with his father went to the workshop/service centre of Opposite Party to get his repaired Bajaj Auto-Rickshaw, there he found that a new chassis had been fixed in his auto-rickshaw, but the Opposite Party had fixed old body in the said auto in place of new body. After inspection of auto-rickshaw, he also found that there was a dent in front portion of said auto-rickshaw. The Complainant also found that the engine cover of the said auto-rickshaw was not fixed properly. The Complainant also found that the Opposite Party without his permission had welded the grill on the said body. Thereafter, upon asking, the manager of the Opposite Party got annoyed and started abusing the Complainant. Then having no option, the father of the Complainant dialled 100 number four times, but no police official came there and the manager threatened the Complainant and his father. The Opposite Party with the collusion of local police pressurizing the Complainant to take the old body by paying the charges of new body. Despite visited many times to the service centre, Opposite Party did not attended the grievances of the Complainant by replacing the old body with new body of the TSR but the Opposite Party intentionally and deliberately threatened to take delivery of auto-rickshaw with old body otherwise face dire consequences. Being the commercial vehicle and finding no other alternative, the Complainant moved a written complaint to local police as well as higher police authorities on 17.06.2017 against the Opposite Party, but no one took any action against the opposite Party. The Complainant has prayed that the Opposite Party may be directed to handover the Bajaj Auto-rickshaw registration no. DL 1RN 9723 after replacing the old body with new body, to pay Rs. 50,000/- on account of harassment, torture, mental agony etc, to pay a further compensation of Rs. 700/- or Rs. 800/- per day from the date 03.06.2017 till the delivery of Bajaj Auto-rickshaw registration no. DL 1RN 9723 for loss of work and Rs. 20,000/- towards litigation charges.  

Case of the Opposite Party

2. The Opposite Party contested the case and filed written statement.  It is submitted by the Opposite Party that the Opposite Party is a partnership firm & authorized dealer of M/s Bajaj Auto Ltd. Engaged in sales and services of commercial three wheeler vehicles and two wheelers. The Opposite Party provides services to its customers maintaining highest level of quality services with utmost care and satisfaction to its customers. It is stated by the Opposite Party that the auto of Complainant met with an accident and was completely in bad shape and deteriorated. Complainant approached Opposite Party and requested to get the bad shaped Chassis & body of his TSR auto bearing vehicle No. DL1RN-9723 changed with new Chassis & body and as instructed by the Complainant, Opposite Party changed the Chassis & body of his auto with new one and made all efforts to make it in good condition & in presentable shape and informed him to verify/check his auto and after getting satisfied to take the delivery of his auto after paying the bill amount. There was not any dispute or differences but Complainant after getting the Chassis & body of his auto changed, has been trying to get the delivery of his auto without paying the bill amount. Complainant has made false allegation that Opposite Party demanded Rs. 83,000/- from him. The bill amount is around Rs. 63,000/- and not Rs. 83,000/-. The allegation of Complainant that the body of his auto has not been changed with new body and he found a dent, cover is not appropriately fixed, there is welding of net on the body, all allegations are wrong and false with sole intension to take the delivery of his auto without making any payment. Opposite Party has completely changed the Chassis and body of his auto with brand new one and therefore, Opposite Party is willing and ready to get it verified from any independent agency or by any expert person of this field. Though it is not necessary but to satisfy Complainant, Opposite Party is again ready to change the body of the Complainant’s auto in the presence of the Complainant if complainant so desires. Otherwise, Opposite Party is ready to get the present auto of complainant checked by any one as may be directed by this Hon’ble Forum. It is further stated that without painted new body of TSR autos are sent by the company i.e. Bajaj Auto Ltd. to its authorized dealers and after affixing with autos/making adjustments/verifying the affixed body, the body of the auto is painted at the workshop with original paint with the assistance of high quality machines as recommended by the company. All allegations made against Opposite Party and the affixed body of the auto of Complainant may be verified/ checked to find out the truth of the case. Complainant is taking undue advantage of the present Act and mala fidely filed this Complaint to harass, pressurize, compel and defame Opposite Party with sole intension to take the delivery without making any payment.

Rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Party

3. The Complainant filed rejoinder to the written statements of Opposite Party wherein the Complainant has denied the pleas raised by the Opposite Party and has reiterated the assertion made in the complaint.

Evidence of the Parties

4. The Complainant in support of his case filed his affidavit wherein he has supported the assertions made in the complaint. To support its case Opposite Party has filed affidavit of Sh. Vijay Kumar Singh, General Manager, M/s J.S Automobiles having office at 3, L.D.A Trust Estate, Kewal Park Extn. Azadpur, Delhi-110033. In his affidavit, he has supported his case as mentioned in the written statement.

Arguments & Conclusion

5. We have heard the Counsels for the Complainant and Opposite Party. We have also perused the file and written arguments filed by the parties.
6.  The case of the Complainant is that he had given his auto rickshaw to the Opposite Party for repairing. It is its case that he was told by the Opposite Party that chassis and body of the auto rickshaw would be placed by new chassis and new body. His case is that the Opposite Party has fixed the new chassis but had fixed some old body in his auto rickshaw. It is also his case that the Opposite Party had given the estimate expenditure to the tune of Rs. 83,000/-.
7. The case of the Opposite Party is that the auto rickshaw of the Complainant had met with some accident and it was in badly damaged condition. It’s case is that it had fixed new chassis and new body in the auto rickshaw of the Complainant. It’s case is that estimate bill of Rs. 63,000/- was prepared and not of Rs. 83,000/- as alleged by the Complainant.
8. From the pleadings and evidence of the parties it is revealed that it is an admitted case that the auto rickshaw of the Complainant had met with some accident and he had given his auto rickshaw to the Opposite Party for repairing. It is the case of the Complainant that the Opposite Party had fixed some old body in his TSR whereas he was told that some new body would be installed in his TSR. The dispute is regarding the body of the auto rickshaw. In its written statement the Opposite Party has stated that whether the body is old or new can be ascertain by some expert and it had gone to the extent of saying that to satisfy the Complainant it can be changed the new body in the presence of the Complainant. Therefore, in view of the submission of the Opposite Party it is ordered that the Opposite Party would change the body of the TSR with the new body in the presence of the Complainant. It is the case of the Opposite Party that the Complainant wants to take his auto rickshaw without making any payment and this is the only reason that he has filed the present complaint. It is made clear that the delivery of the auto rickshaw shall be handed over to the Complainant after pays the repairing charges to the Opposite Party.
9. The Complainant has prayed for payment of Rs. 700/- or Rs. 800/- per day for loss of work. The Complainant has not leaded any evidence that he was not doing any work during the days for which he is claiming the said amount. It is also important to the noted that the grievance of the Complainant is that some old body was fixed in his TSR instead of new body. It is not his case that the auto rickshaw was not road worthy. After the Opposite Party has made submission in its written statement that it was prepared to replace the body with new body in the presence of the Complainant, he would have agree for the same and should have taken his auto rickshaw for driving.  Under these circumstances, we do not see any justification to grant this compensation to the Complainant. In the facts and circumstance of the case, the Opposite Party shall pay compensation of Rs. 15,000/- to the Complainant (on account of litigation charges and harassment etc.) along with interest @ 6 % p.a from the date of this order till recovery.
10. Order announced on 16.02.2023.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost

File be consigned to Record Room.

(Anil Kumar Bamba)           Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President