1)                   Sri Parthajit Santra,

                Village-Digha Gour Banga Road,

                P.O. Borogagalli, P.S. Haringhata,

                Dist. Nadia, Pin-741221.                                                                                    _________ Complainant

____Versus____

1)                   The Tata Motors, represented by its

                Managing Director, Bombay House,

                24 Homi Modi St. Fort Mumbai – 400001.   

2)            The General Manger, Tata Motors Ltd.,

                 Kolkata-16, P.S. Park Street,

                 Passenger Car Business Unit,

                 Apeejey House, 5th Floor, Block ‘A’,

                 15, Park Street.

3)            The General Manager, Lexus Motors,

                Tata Motors Ltd., Kolkata-17,

                209, A.J.C. Bose Road,

                P.S. Shakespeare Sarani.

4)                   The Bajla Motor, 2 ½ mile Sebok
Road Siliguri Darjeeling 734001.

5)                   Mahindra & Mahindra Finance Service Ltd.,

Rubi Auto Building, 2 ½ mile Sebok Road,

Siliguri, Darjeeling 734001.          

6)                   CRM Tata Motors Ltd., Kolkata-16,

P.S. Park Street, Apeejey House,

5th Floor, Block ‘A’, 15, Park Street.                                               ________ Opposite Parties

Present :                Sri Sankar Nath Das, Hon’ble President

                          Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.

                                Smt.  Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member

Order No.   23    Dated  05/09/2014.

            In precise the case of the complainant is that the complainant has purchased one Tata Indica V2 (Diesel) car being regn. no.WB-24K-2824 on 30.9.08 from o.p. company. The complainant stated that on 6.1.10 the said car had started problem with an indication that “Check Engine” when the car has already plied 30,498 km. Thereafter complainant approached Lexus Motors for repairing of the same. In this connection the complainant also stated that the car was having warranty for 18 months from the date of purchase or plying of 50,000 km, whichever is less. But no document has been annexed by the complainant with the petition of complaint to that effect. The said car after repairing from Lexus Motors on 14.4.10 again started same problem and was not in a position to ply when the same car has already been plied 35,599 km. The complainant once again handed over the same to Lexus Motors for rendering necessary repairing works. But unfortunately, after releasing therefrom the said car was not in a position to ply for the same defect as has been stated hereinabove as disclosed by the complainant. The complainant intimated to the General Manager, Tata Motors stating all details vide his letter dt.24.4.11 which has been annexed with the petition of complaint vide running page 2. It appears from running page no.11 as has been annexed by complainant with the complaint petition that Tata Motors Ltd. has observed that the car was suffering from fuel injection pump including timing adjustment i.e. check engine. Hence the indication is coming “Check Engine” and for which they have estimated for an amount of Rs.5620/- for repairing of the same. K.B Motors Pvt. Ltd. i.e. authorized dealer of Tata Motors also communicated to the Branch Manager, Mahindra and Mahindra Finance Service Ltd. by its letter dt.27.12.10 which has been annexed as running page 4 with the petition of complaint wherefrom it is evident that the said sender of the letter clearly interalia stated that the said car is unable to exchange even since there are problem as has been stated hereinabove.

                O.ps. appeared in the matter by filing w/v and contested the case and they have submitted that the allegations as has been stated by the complainant is not correct and have no legal value since complainant failed to submit any document towards the warranty of the said car as has been stated by complainant. Ld. lawyer of o.ps. argued that the case be dismissed since there is no ground by the complainant to file the case.

Decision with reasons:

                On perusal of the entire materials on record and considering the submissions by the parties during argument, we are of the view that the car in question possessed some manufacturing problem otherwise Lexus Motors could not receive the car for repairing job as has been detailed in the job card which has been annexed in page no.11 and running page of the petition of complaint. Moreover, K.B. Motors one of the authorized dealer of Tata Motors has clearly interalia stated that the said car is even unable to exchange which has been evident from running page no.4 as an annexure annexed by the complainant with the petition of complaint. Accordingly o.p. nos.1, 2 and 3 had sufficient deficiency in service being service providers towards the consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.

                Hence, ordered,

                That the case is allowed on contest with cost against o.p. nos.1, 2 and 3 and is dismissed without cost against o.p. nos.4, 5 and 6. O.p. nos.1, 2 and 3 are jointly and/or severally directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) only as compensation for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.7000/- (Rupees seven thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.

                Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.