D.o.F:11/8/09 D.o.O: 04/02/2010 IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD CC.184/09 Dated this, the 4th day of February 2010 PRESENT: SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER SMT.P.P.SYAMALADEVI : MEMBER Ameer Ali S/o Moideenkutty, : Complainant Kodankai House,Kalanad PO,Kasaragod (Adv.George John Plamoottil,Hosdurg) Manager, KTC Automobiles Pvt.Ltd, : Opposite party N.A.Enclave,Vidyanagar, Opp.KWA office,Kasaragod. (Adv.Easwarabhat.P,Kasaragod) ORDER SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT The skeletal facts of the complaint are that the Santro car bearing Reg.No. KL-14 H 2816 belongs to the complainant met with an accident and he entrusted the vehicle for repair with the opposite party. After collecting Rs.17648/- towards repair charges the opposite party returned back the car to the complainant on 27/2/09. Due to the imperfection in the repair the car lost its pulling capacity. Hence it was again taken to opposite party for repair on 26/3/2009 and the complainant paid Rs.2152/- towards the repair charges. After this repair also there was abnormal emission of smoke during starting the vehicle. Hence again the complainant approached the opposite party for rectifying the defects on 8/4/2009 and after repair paid Rs.821/- towards the repair charges. All these defects were continued due to the improper repairs by the opposite party. Since the complaints persisted the complainant took the car, which was a brand new one to Apco vehicle Pvt.Ltd Calicut for expert management and repair . The Apco vehicles repaired the car perfectly and collected Rs. 18835/- on 3/7/2009. Though complainant several times demanded the opposite party to refund the repair charges they declined to his demand. Hence complainant sent a registered notice on 11/5/2009 claiming compensation . It was also not attained fruition . Hence the complaint. According to opposite party, the vehicle was brought to them to repair the damages caused by the accident and accordingly they repaired the damages. But the complainant did not instruct the opposite party to go through the complaints in any other parts of the vehicle and hence opposite party is not bound to test the vehicle in any way other than the damages caused by the accident. The subsequent complaints to the vehicle were caused due to the complaints in the engine and then and there the opposite party properly appreciated the complainant that there would be serious mistakes in the engine also. The complainant was not ready to put the vehicle for repairing the engine. Thereby the intermittent defects occurred. Opposite party also contended that without proper instruction and advise for repairing the vehicle as a whole the opposite party cannot and would not repair the vehicle in its entirety . The complainant himself is responsible for not instructing and advising the opposite party to repair the vehicle in its entirety. The alleged defect by the complainant had occurred after 2 1/2 months after the last repair by the opposite party. Therefore, complainant cannot allege improper service by the opposite party. The complainant ought to have made clear as to why the subsequent occasion for repair occurred by proper cogent evidence. The allegation of lack of pulling and emission of smoke in the vehicle is false. The complainant himself was negligent in using the vehicle in the proper way as directed by the company. The lack of pulling power to the engine and emission of smoke etc occurred due to the improper water cooling arrangement. The second, third and forth visit of the complainant is due to the overheating of the engine due to the improper water cooling facility. Had there been any deficiencies on the occasion of first repair then the complainant could not run the vehicle upto 26/3/09 and then upto 8/4/09 and there after 24/4/09. Therefore, the allegation is made only to harass the opposite party. The complaint is liable to be dismissed. Complainant filed affidavit in support of his case and faced cross examination by the counsel for opposite party. Exts.A1 to A4 marked. On the side of opposite party, Anish an employee of opposite party filed affidavit . He was cross examined by the counsel for the complainant. Both sides heard. Documents scrutinized. Is there any deficiency in the repair effected by the opposite party to the car of the complainant is the only issue to be settled in this case. The case of the complainant is that his car involved in an accident and it was taken to accident repair to opposite party returned the vehicle after accidental repair on 27/2/09. But due to the deficient repair the pulling of the vehicle is loss. Thereafter though it was taken to opposite party 3 times, the defects were not rectified . Hence he constrained to take the vehicle to another repairer at Calicut. Against the case the opposite party took a contention that the complainant did not instruct the opposite party to go through the complaints in other parts of the vehicle and as such the opposite party is not bound to lost the vehicle in any way other than the damages caused by the accident. This contention is not acceptable without a pinch of salt. DW1 the service in-charge of opposite party deposed that when a vehicle is brought after accident then mechanics will inspect the vehicle and note the damages. The owner of the vehicle may not be aware about the damages sustained to the vehicle in the accident. It is pertinent to note that the vehicle was a brand new one. Hence it is hard to believe that complainant did not instruct the opposite party to go through any other parts of the vehicle and as such opposite party is not bound to test in any other way than the damages caused by the accident. It is not to the vehicle owner but only the repairer can find out what exactly are the defects. Even if this version is believed then the complainant should have allowed to test other parts of the body during second time or third time since he was incessantly bringing the vehicle with repeated complains. A brand new vehicle is expected provide untroubled service for long, at least during its warranty period. But in this case it is seen that the vehicle was garaged with opposite party for repeated complaints after accident. Thereafter it is also revealed that after the repair from Apco vehicles(India) Pvt.Ltd Kozhikode the car became perfect. The opposite party has not take any steps to negate this aspect. Hence the only thing to be concluded is that the repair done by the opposite party was deficient and that caused the repeated repairs of the complainant’s vehicle. The contention that the vehicle was taken to Apco Vehicles(P)Ltd Kozhikode after 2 ½ months from the date of last repair would not lead to any inference that the car was running smoothly during the said 2 ½ months. The complainant has stated in his affidavit that he could not use the vehicle for 6 months. Reliefs and costs: The complainant has paid Rs.21502/- to the opposite party for the repair of the vehicle which did not yield him satisfactory result. Though the accidental repairs may have rectified the defects to a certain extent it was not made the vehicle in good condition. The complainant has suffered hardships and sufferings since he was denied the trouble free enjoyment of the vehicle approximately for 6 months Hence the opposite party is liable to pay compensation to the complainant on that account. Hence the complaint is allowed in part and the opposite party is directed to pay a lumpsum amount of Rs.15000/- by way of compensation to the complainant with a cost of Rs.2000/-. Time for compliance is limited to 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which the compensation of Rs.15,000/- will carry interest @12% per annum from the date of complaint till payment. Sd/ Sd/ Sd/ MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT Exts: A1series -cash invoice A2-11/5/9- copy of lawyer notice A3-Acknowledgment A4-copy of RC PW1-Ameer Ali- complainant DW1-Anish.K.T-Service-in-charge of OP Sd/ Sd/ Sd/ MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT eva/ /Forwarded by Order/ SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
......................K.T.Sidhiq
......................P.P.Shymaladevi
......................P.Ramadevi | | 
