Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/95/2014

B.Harish - Complainant(s)

Versus

M.K.Motors - Opp.Party(s)

A.Ilaya Perumal

16 Jul 2019

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 18.02.2014

                                                                          Date of Order : 16.07.2019

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP.  : MEMBER

 

C.C. No.95/2014

DATED THIS TUESDAY THE 16^TH DAY OF JULY 2019

                                 

B. Harish,

S/o. Mr. T.K. Babu,

Door No.I-62, Ramar Koil Street,

Tirur Village & Post,

Thiruvallur Taluk & District – 602 025.                          .. Complainant.                                                        

..Versus..

 

1. TVS Motor Company Limited,

Rep. by its General Manager,

P.B. No.1, Bythahalli,

Kadakola Post,

Mysore – 571 311.

 

2. TVS Motor Company Limited,

Represented by its Manager,

1^st Floor, SPL-Sriram Nivas,

No.38, Venkatakrishna Road,

Mandaveli,

Chennai – 600 028.

 

3. M.K. Motors,

Authorised Main Dealer: TVS Motor Company,

No.165, J.N. Road,

Thiruvallur – 602 001.

 

4. Boopathy Motors,

Represented by its Authorised Signatory,

No.73/14, CTH Road,

No.89, Veppampattu,

Thiruvallur District – 602 024.

 

5. Raghava Motors,

Represented by its Authorised Signatory,

Plot No.3677, TNHB,

Bye-Pass Main Road,

Thiruvallur – 602 001.

 

6. Vijay Motors,

Represented by its Authorised Signatory,

No.298, C.T.H. Road,

Avadi,

Chennai – 600 054.                                                 ..  Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the complainant             : M/s. A. Ilaya Perumal & others

Counsel for the opposite parties

1, 2, 4, 5 & 6                                      : M/s. R. Veera Raghavan

3^rd opposite party                                : Exparte

         

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties 1 to 6 under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to replace the APACHE-180 NEW BLACK with a new vehicle of the same model and to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation for damages for mental agony with cost to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he approached the 3^rd opposite party to purchase a TVS APACHE-180 NEW BLACK Motor cycle and paid an advance amount of Rs.1,000/- on 24.01.2013.   The complainant submits that he has taken delivery of a Motor cycle on 15.01.2013 after paying entire sale amount of Rs.79,000/-.   The complainant submits that the opposite party sold the used vehicle.   The complainant submits that the 3^rd opposite party has collected further additional amount of Rs.6,665/-.  The complainant submits that the motor cycle had some abnormal engine sound and disc sound.  Hence, the fact was informed to the 3^rd opposite party who is an authorized dealer and handed over the vehicle for the 1^st service on 19.03.2013.  At that the time, the battery was replaced with a second hand one.  The complainant submits that even after the repair of the motor cycle, the complainant was not able to use the vehicle due to the engine sound and disc sound.  The complainant submits that there was continuous problem in the motor cycle like Spark in Electrical Plug, huge noise, no smoothness, silencer problem and mileage problem to the tune of 25 kms/lr. The complainant submits that the noise problem and other problems are persisting and the complaint took the vehicle to the 5^th opposite party claiming replacement of vehicle.  Therefore, the complainant has given the said vehicle for service to the 5^th opposite party on 11.09.2013 by intimating all the above said defects.  The 5^th opposite party had given assurance that all the said repairs will be cleared or otherwise new vehicle will be given.    Thereafter, the complainant sent emails dated:04.10.2013 & 08.10.2013 by intimating all the above said problems to the 1^st opposite party.  But nobody has given any responsibility for the complainant’s complaints. Since, there was no responsibility on the complainant’s complaint and the complainant approached the 5^th opposite party and intimated all the above said facts.   The 5^th opposite party has directed the complainant to take back the said vehicle or otherwise, the said vehicle will not be returned hereafter therefore, the complainant was constrained to take back the said vehicle on 12.10.2013 without clearing all the above said problems.   The complainant submits that due to the said problems, the complainant was not only put mental agony but also make the trouble on moving and it would cause endanger to the life of the complainant.   The act of the opposite parties 1 to 6 amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice which caused great mental agony.  Hence, the complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by opposite parties 1, 2, 4, 5 & 6 is as follows:

The opposite parties 1, 2, 4, 5 & 6 specifically deny each and every allegations made in the complaint and put the complainant to strict proof of the same.  The opposite parties 1, 2, 4, 5 & 6 state that the opposite parties 1 & 2 are the manufacturers, the opposite parties 3 to 6 are the authorized dealers.  The 3^rd opposite party dealer sold the vehicle to the complainant as per the stipulations.   The complainant has not raised any allegations against the opposite parties 4 & 5.  The complainant used to bring down the vehicle for service and due service will be done to the entire satisfaction then and there. The complainant also issued a letter of satisfaction dated:05.10.2013.  The opposite parties 1, 2, 4, 5 & 6 state that the complainant brought the vehicle for repeated services at every time, the opposite parties duly serviced the vehicle to the entire satisfaction of the complainant and the complainant took the vehicle and drove the vehicle to the tune of 4944 kms.  On 12.12.2013, the opposite parties requested the complainant to inspect the vehicle and taken delivery of the vehicle.   But the complainant not turned up and issued lawyers notice dated:24.12.2013 and for which, the 1^st opposite party sent suitable reply dated:15.02.2014.  Till date, the vehicle is with the opposite parties kept ready for delivery.  There is no manufacturing defect in the above said vehicle.  Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties 1, 2, 4, 5 & 6 and hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     Inspite of receipt of notice, the 3^rd opposite party has not been appeared before this Forum and hence, the 3^rd opposite party was set exparte.  

4.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A20 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties 1, 2, 4, 5 & 6 is filed and documents Ex.B1 to Ex.B18 are marked on the side of the opposite parties 1, 2, 4, 5 & 6.

5.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to the replacement of APACHE-180 NEW BLOCK to a new vehicle as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and deficiency in service with cost as prayed for?

 

6.      On point:-

Inspite of receipt of notice, the 3^rd opposite party has not appeared before this Forum and hence, the 3^rd opposite party was set exparte.  Both parties filed their respective written arguments.   Heard the 1^st, 2^nd, 4^th, 5^th & 6^th opposite parties’ Counsel also.  Perused the records namely; the complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.  The complainant pleaded and contended that he approached the 3^rd opposite party to purchase a TVS APACHE-180 NEW BLACK Motor cycle and paid an advance amount of Rs.1,000/- on 24.01.2013 as per Ex.A3.  Ex.A4 is the copy of receipt showing the booking of TVS APACHE-180 NEW/ BLACK issued by the 3^rd opposite party.  Further the contention of the complainant is that he has taken delivery of  a Motor cycle on 15.01.2013 after paying entire sale amount of Rs.79,000/-.  But on a careful perusal of Ex.A4, that on 19.02.2013 a cash receipt received for a sum of Rs.85,665/- the opposite party also issued  delivery note dated:19.02.2013 as per Ex.A5 which is very clear that a ‘APACHE-180 NEW’ vehicle has been delivered and was duly insured as per Ex.A6 and registered the vehicle as per Ex.A2 bearing registration No.TN-20-CB-3204.   

7.     Further the contention of the complainant is that the opposite party sold the used vehicle.   But there is no record.   The contention of the complainant is that the 3^rd opposite party has collected an additional amount of Rs.6,665/-; is not acceptable in the absence of any record.   Further the contention of the complainant is that the motor cycle had some engine sound and disc sound.  Hence, the fact was informed to the 3^rd opposite party who is an authorized dealer and handed over the vehicle for the 1^st service on 19.03.2013 as per Ex.A7.  At that time, the battery was replaced with a second hand one.  For that also, there is no record.  Ex.A8 is the copy of bill for a sum of Rs.270/-.  Further the contention of the complainant is that even after the repair of the motor cycle, the complainant was not able to use the vehicle due to the engine sound and disc sound.  But on careful perusal of the service records, there is nothing about the disc sound and engine sound. 

8.     Further the contention of the complainant is that there was continuous problem in the motor cycle like Spark in Electrical Plug, huge noise, no smoothness, silencer problem and mileage problem to the tune of 25 kms /lr.  But the complainant has not taken any steps to prove such deficiency including mileage problem.  All the service records are absolutely silent regarding the said defectives.   Further the contention of the complainant is that the noise problem and other problems are persisting and the complaint took the vehicle to the 5^th opposite party claiming replacement of vehicle.  But the complainant has not taken any steps to prove the manufacturing defect for replacement.  All the other defects shall be rectified by replacement of spare parts of the said vehicle.   In this case the opposite parties, serviced the vehicle then and there is proved from the service records.  Equally, the service records are silent regarding the manufacturing defect.  Further the contention of the complainant is that due to the frequent repair for the motor cycle, the complainant was not able to continue his education by attending classes regularly and sustained severe mental agony but failed to prove that he is unable ride the vehicle because of the manufacturing defect in the vehicle and there is default in attending or continuing the education by the complainant.  The complainant is claiming a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony.  But the complainant has not proved the basis of claim in such a manner known to law.

9.     The learned Counsel for the opposite parties 1, 2, 4, 5 & 6 would contend that the opposite parties 1 & 2 are the manufacturers, the opposite parties 3 to 6 are the authorized dealers.  The 3^rd opposite party dealer sold the vehicle to the complainant as per the stipulations.   The complainant has not raised any allegations against the opposite parties 4 & 5.  Ex.A10 & Ex.A11 are the bills issued by the opposite parties 4 & 5 related to the service.  Equally, Ex.A7, Ex.A8, Ex.A9 & Ex.A12 are the copy of bills issued by the 3^rd opposite party.   None of the service records show the manufacturing defects in the impugned vehicle.  The complainant used to bring down the vehicle for service and due service will be done to the entire satisfaction then and there.  The complainant also issued a letter dated:05.10.2013 as per Ex.B17 proves the satisfaction.  Further the contention of the opposite parties 1, 2, 4, 5 & 6 is that the complainant brought the vehicle for repeated services at every time.   Ex.B2 to Ex.B16 are the service coupons and the job cards.  Every time, the opposite parties duly serviced the vehicle to the entire satisfaction of the complainant and the complainant took the vehicle and drove the vehicle to the tune of 4944 kms.  On 12.12.2013, the opposite parties requested the complainant to inspect the vehicle and take delivery of the vehicle.   But the complainant not turned up and issued lawyers notice dated:24.12.2013 as per Ex.A17 for which, the 1^st opposite party sent suitable reply dated:15.02.2014 as per Ex.A20.  Till date, the vehicle is with the opposite parties ready for delivery.  There is no manufacturing defect in the impugned vehicle.  The complainant has not taken any steps to prove the manufacturing defect.  In this case, the vehicle was kept ready for delivery and the complainant has not taken steps to collect the vehicle from the opposite parties.   Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that this complaint has to be dismissed.

In the result, this complaint is dismissed.   No costs.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 16^th day of July 2019. 

 

MEMBER                                                                                PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.A1	27.11.2012	Copy of driving license
Ex.A2		Copy of Registration Certificate
Ex.A3	24.01.2013	Copy of receipt issued by the 3rd opposite party
Ex.A4	19.02.2013	Copy of receipt issued by the 3rd opposite party
Ex.A5	19.02.2013	Copy of Delivery Note issued by the 3rd opposite party
Ex.A6	07.03.2013	Copy of Motor Insurance Certificate
Ex.A7	19.03.2013	Copy of service made by the 3rd opposite party
Ex.A8	14.06.2013	Copy of bill issued by the 3rd opposite party
Ex.A9	19.06.2013	Copy of service made by the 3rd opposite party
Ex.A10	10.07.2013	Copy of bill issued by the 4th opposite party
Ex.A11	31.07.2013	Copy of bill issued by the 5th opposite party
Ex.A12	19.09.2013	Copy of service made by the 3rd opposite party
Ex.A13	04.10.2013	Copy of the email complaint of the complainant
Ex.A14	08.10.2013	Copy of the email complaint of the complainant
Ex.A15	24.11.2013	Copy of service made by the 6th opposite party
Ex.A16		Copy of Service Book
Ex.A17	24.12.2013	Copy of legal notice sent by the complainant through his Counsel
Ex.A18		Copy of acknowledgement cards
Ex.A19		Copy of returned cover
Ex.A20	15.02.2014	Copy of reply by the 1st opposite party

 

OPPOSITE PARTIES 1, 2, 4 5 & 6  SIDE DOCUMENTS:-  

Ex.B1		Copy of terms of warranty for Apache RTR 180 (pages from owner’s manual of vehicle)
Ex.B2		Copy of first free service coupon (page form owner’s manual for vehicle)
Ex.B3		Copy of second free service coupon (page form owner’s manual for vehicle)
Ex.B4		Copy of third free service coupon (page form owner’s manual for vehicle)
Ex.B5		Copy of fourth free service coupon (page form owner’s manual for vehicle)
Ex.B6		Copy of fifth free service coupon (page form owner’s manual for vehicle)
Ex.B7		Copy of sixth free service coupon (page form owner’s manual for vehicle)
Ex.B8		Copy of seventh free service coupon (page form owner’s manual for vehicle)
Ex.B9		Copy of eighth free service coupon (page form owner’s manual for vehicle)
Ex.B10		Copy of ninth free service coupon (page form owner’s manual for vehicle)
Ex.B11		Copy of tenth free service coupon (page form owner’s manual for vehicle)
Ex.B12		Copy of eleventh free service coupon (page form owner’s manual for vehicle)
Ex.B13	10.07.2013	Copy of Job Card
Ex.B14	30.07.2013	Copy of Job Card
Ex.B15	11.09.2013	Copy of Job Card
Ex.B16	04.10.2013	Copy of Job Card
Ex.B17	05.10.2013	Copy of the letter of the complainant’s satisfaction
Ex.B18	25.11.2013	Copy of Job Card

 

 

                              

MEMBER                                                                                PRESIDENT