District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh

CC/740/2019

BEFORE:

          RATTAN SINGH THAKUR, PRESIDENT

          SURJEET KAUR, MEMBER

          SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, MEMBER

PRESENT:

None for complainant

Dated : 30^th July 2019

ORDER

1.      The grievance of the complainant is, he used to get his Maruti Suzuki Swift Model 2012 car serviced from the OP satisfactorily. The said vehicle was purchased by the complainant in the name of his father and he happened to be the user of the same. The last service of the vehicle got done by the complainant from the OP was poor one. Though charges of wheel alignment and wheel balancing were taken, but, in fact, the said works were not done. Complainant’s case is, non-alignment and non-wheel balancing tore off tyres of the car as a result of which he got replaced the tyres. 
2.      After hearing one sided arguments, we have noted, from where the wheel alignment and wheel balancing were got done was not disclosed by the complainant.  Not only this, even record was not produced, in fact, he got it done from another service centre of Maruti or some authorised person of wheel alignment and wheel balancing.  In absence of said record, it could not be said, there was problem in wheel alignment and wheel balancing after the last service got done by the complainant from the OP on 7.3.2019. There is no proof to this effect, therefore, the recitals contained in Annexure C-1 of the service charges needs to be believed that wheel alignment and wheel balancing were done by OP for which the amount was charged.
3.      The case of the complainant is, on 14.5.2019, he got four tyres replaced from Sahni Motors, Chandigarh. There is no pleading how much was the life of the tyres replaced, how much distance tyres had covered on the date of last service on 7.3.2019 and after running how much kilometers, those were got replaced. No allegation to this effect put forth by the complainant so as to hold, after service of the vehicle on 7.3.2019, the tyres wore off and it had connection with deficiency in service by the OP on 7.3.2019.  The consumer complaint is vague on these allegations and in the absence of any record, the allegations seems to be in air.  From this record, allegation of prima facie deficiency in service on the part of the OP not made out. 
4.      In view of the above discussion, we find no reason to admit the present consumer complaint and proceed to dismiss the same at preliminary stage. We order accordingly.
5.      The certified copies of this order be sent to the complainant free of charge. The file be consigned.