Punjab

Fatehgarh Sahib

CC/74/2019

Surjit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Kamal Motors Chandigarh - Opp.Party(s)

Sh Gurdeep Singh

02 May 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, FATEHGARH SAHIB.

                                                             

CC. No	:	CC/74 of 2019
Date of Institution.	:	8.11.2019
Date of Decision	:	2.5.2023

 

 

Surjit Singh son of Chotta Singh resident of Village Bathan Kalan, Tehsil Khamano, District Fatehgarth Sahib  .

                                                                                                                     …………....Complainants

                                                Versus

 Kamal Motors, Chandigarh-Ludhiana Road Khamano, Tehsil Khamano, District Fatehgarh Sahib through its proprietor.

                                                                              ..………....... Opposite Party

 

Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986(Old)

Quorum

Sh. S.K. Aggarwal, President

Ms. Shivani Bhargava, Member

Sh. Manjit Singh Bhinder, Member

Present:  Sh.Gurdeep Singh, counsel  for the complainant.

      Opposite party  in Person.

 

 The  complaint has been filed against the OP (opposite party),  Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act-1986 (old) alleging deficiency in service with the prayer for giving direction to the OP to  refund  of Rs.60,575/-  i.e amount of  scooter  along with compensation or replace scooter in question with new one.

1.  The  complainant purchased a maestro Edge (Cast Wheel)  Hero motor make scooter on 26.03.2019 from the OP for a sum of Rs.60,575/-. In the start of April the scooter had some starting problem and generated different type of noise from the engine   . The complainant visited the company /workshop of OP for its check up, where after check up the OP told complainant that it was a minor problem and asked him to visit after two days.  The complainant again visited the Company /Workshop of OP for getting the starting problem  checked and OP told him that there was problem in oil pump of scooter . The complainant requested OP to replace the oil pump as the scooter was under guarantee/warrantee. The OP told complainant that he had already ordered the oil pump and that it would take 8 to 10 days. The complainant , after 8  to 10 days against visited the workshop of OP for replacement of oil pump but the OP kept postponing the matter . The complainant came to know from some reliable sources that  the problem in the scooter was not minor and there was a problem in  major part of scooter and OP had sold a defective piece to the complainant. Inspite of repeated requests made by the complainant the OP did not replace the scooter neither replaced the defective part of scooter. Therefore, the complainant issued a legal notice dated 17.5.2019 requesting OP to replace the scooter or replace defective part of scooter. But the OPs  did not bother to replace or repair the scooter. Hence this complaint.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OP through registered Post, OP appeared in person  and filed  written version.
3. The complaint has been contested by the OP, filed written version ,raised preliminary objections. The OP has admitted to sale of scooter to complainant on 26.3.2019 .  The complainant has been regularly getting the service of scooter done by at OP’s workshop .  Whenever, any vehicle is brought for service/repair to OP’s workshop, a job card is prepared  after enquiring after inquiring  about defects  from owner / representative , so that  their mechanic removes the defects on basis of the job card.  The copies of Job card reveal that there is no mention of any defect in the oil pump of the scooter .  Further the complainant’s representative has signed on the job cards , while taking delivery of scooter after services , indicating satisfactory service done by OP.  The warranty period of scooter  is for l5 years or 50,000 KM and during this period any part which comes defective is repaired / replaced. This work is paid by the Company and therefore, no agency owner shall have any objection to this. The OP had received the notice sent by the complainant and  upon this the OP tried to contact the complainant so as to remove defect in scooter, if any ,  to complainant’s satisfaction .  But no contact could be made with the complainant and thus neither any defect could be ascertained .  The OP is ready to remove   defect in the scooter ,  if any , for which the complainant can visit workshop from Monday to Friday between 9:00 A.M to 5:00 P.M, on any day.  The OP has requested that complainant may be sent to his agency with vehicle so that defect , if any may be removed to the complainant’s satisfaction.
4. To support his complaint , the complainant has tendered in evidence Ex.CW1/A his affidavit, Ex.C1 R.C,  Ex.C2 certificate of Policy schedule, Ex.C3 recipe dated 26.3.2019, Ex.C4free service coupon, Ex.C5 legal notice, Ex.C6 Postal receipts. In rebuttal, the OP  has placed on record along with version Job Cards dated 5.4.2019, 13.4.2019, ,16.4.2019, 5.9.2019, 4.1.2020 and vehicle history card of the scooter in question.
5. In the 5 number Job cards placed on record by OP , there is no mention of defective oil pump of the scooter.  Job cards dated 5.9.2019 and 4.1.2020 have been  duly signed by the complainant/ representative that  the vehicle had been duly serviced/ repaired to entire satisfaction.
6. From the evidence / record , it can not be held that there is some defect in the oil pump of scooter which needs repair / replacement , as the complainant has not mentioned this defect in  any of the Job Cards . Further the complainant / representative had signed regarding satisfactory repair/service on two number Job Cards dated 4.1.2020 and 5.9.2019 i.e before filing of this complaint as well as after filing of the complaint.

1. In view of the above  discussion and inference, we feel that  the complainant could not prove that  there was any  deficiency in service on the part of OP, who is still willing to attend to defect , if any, in the scooter . As such,  the present  complaint  is hereby  dismissed  with no order  as to cost. Copy of this order be sent to the complainant and the OPs as per rules. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to pandemic of Covid-19 and paucity of staff. File be consigned to record Room.

Pronounced 2 May 2023

                                             

                                                                      (S. K. Aggarwal)

                                                                              President

                                                                    

    

                                                                             (Shivani Bhargava)

                                                                              Member

 

                                                                             (Sh. Manjit Singh Bhinder )

                                                                                         Member