Haryana

StateCommission

A/499/2016

JAGMOHAN MOTORS - Complainant(s)

Versus

LEH RAJ SHARMA - Opp.Party(s)

N.K.MALHOTRA

22 Jul 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                             

                                                         First Appeal No.499 of 2016

Date of Institution: 01.06.2016

                                                           Date of Decision: 22.07.2016

 

Jagmohan Motors Ltd. Maruti Authorized Dealer,Sonepat Road,Rohtak 124001 through its Authorized Signatory, Jai Bhagwan Rohilla, Personal Manager.

…..Appellant

Versus

1.         Lakh Raj Sharma S/o Sh.Ram Sarup R/o H.NO.1824, Urban Estate, Jind-126102.

2.         Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Plot No.1 Nellson Mandela Road,Vasant Kunj New Delhi 110070 through its Agency/Dealer Akans Motors, Safidon road, Jind.

3.         Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Palam Gurgaon road,Gurgaon 122015 through its dealer Akans Motors, Safidon Road, Jind.

4.         National Insurance Co. Ltd. through Manager NIC branch office, Jind (Insurer of Car No.HR-31F-4902 vide its cover note No.3510103112131809169 date of issue 11.08.2012).

5.         Pasco Automobiles Pasco House-6 Palam Gurgaon Road, Industrial Estate, Gurgaon 122015.

                                                …..Respondents

 

CORAM:                    Mr. R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member.

                                    Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.                                                                                                                                                                          

Present:                     Shri  N.K.Malhotra, Advocate counsel for appellant.

 

                                                               O R D E R

URVASHI AGNIHOTRI, MEMBER:

 

1. Jagmohan Motors Ltd. - OP is in appeal against the Order dated 05.05.2016 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short ‘District Forum’), Jind directing OP-2 shall refund an amount of Rs.1,10,499/- along with interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 30.05.2013 till its actual realization alongwith litigation expenses of Rs.3300/-.
2. Briefly stated, the complainant - Lekh Raj Sharma purchased a Maruti Swift Diesel Car bearing registration No.HR-31-F-4902 for a sum of Rs.5,64,721/- from OP No.2 which was delivered by OP No.1 at Jind. At the time of purchase the Company issued certificate of extended warranty registration dated 19.08.2010 for three years, valid upto 18.08.2013 or upto 60000 Kms by charging from the complainant extra amount for three years warranty. The engine of the vehicle started producing heavy sound and some time its sound became unbearable and the vehicle did not even start. The complainant availed four free services in different service stations, but the defect of the vehicle was not removed by the authorized dealers. On 07.01.2013 in the morning when the complainant tried to start the vehicle it did start and the complainant informed the OP No.1 about the same. OP No.1 informed the complainant to apprise OP No.2 about the defect of the vehicle. The vehicle was shifted in the workshop of OP No.2, who lateron informed the complainant that its engine was a defective one and had to be replaced with a new one. Accordingly, the engine was replaced and a bill of Rs.1,10,499/- dated 21.01.2013 was handed over to the complainant, who deposited its amount with OP No.2. Thereafter, the complainant served a legal notice on 2.02.2013 upon the OPs and when nothing was done to redress his grievance he approached the District Forum for the refund the amount of Rs.1,10,499/- with interest @24% p.a., a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- as compensation alongwith litigation expenses.  
3. In reply, the OPs pleaded that during inspection, starter of the motor was found bent which clearly substantiated a case of ‘hydrostatic lock’. Since, the repairs were not covered under warranty as per terms Clause 4 (e) & (h) and were to be carried out on chargeable basis, the complainant consented to pay the bill for the necessary repairs. Thereafter, the vehicle became fully in order and without any defect. Therefore, since there was no deficiency in service on their part, the complaint was liable to be dismissed.  However, the learned District Forum rejected the pleas raised by the OPs and accepted the complaint vide order dated 05.05.2016 by granting the aforesaid relief.
4. Against this Order, the OP-2 has filed Appeal before us contending that the learned District Forum has not taken into consideration the expert report as well as the terms and conditions wherein it was specifically mentioned that if there is any negligence on the part of the owner of the vehicle and any defect caused by misuse, negligence, abnormal use or insufficient care, that will not come under the warranty policy. Therefore, they were not liable for any compensation whatsoever and the same submissions as made before the District Forum have been reiterated before us.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and have also gone through the record. In fact, its stand established by documentary evidence that the vehicle was defective and was detected so during the warranty period. Further, the nature of the defect was certainly a manufacturing one as found and reported by the OP’s own engineers. If any other party has not come forward to own the liability and to compensate the complainant, he was not to suffer for their internal arrangement regarding payment. Before us, the appeal has been filed only by Jagmohan Motors Ltd. – OP-2 and not by any other party. In view of this factual position evidence by relevant document as well as by expert opinion, we do not find an merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed.
6. The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules.

 

 

July 22nd, 2016             Urvashi Agnihotri                                   R.K.Bishnoi,                                                     Member                                                Judicial Member                                                Addl. Bench                                          Addl.Bench

S.K.