Date of filing :28-07-2008 Date of order :13-02-2009 IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD CC123/08 Dated this, the 13th day of February 2009 PRESENT SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER SMT.P.P.SHYMALADEVI : MEMBER Dr. N. Krishna Bhat, Registered Medical Practitioner, } Complainant Govinda Nivas, Nayak’s Road, Kasaragod. (Adv. I.V.Bhat, Kasaragod) 1. M/s Amana Toyata V.P.K. Motores (P)Ltd, } Opposite parties Thottada, Po.Kannur. 670 007. (Adv. P.Faizal & K. Rajesh, Kasaragod) 2. Goodyear India Ltd, Mathura Road, Ballalgarh, Faridabad, Haryana (Exparte) O R D E R SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ, PRESIDENT Pruned off all other averments and allegations the case of the complainant Dr.N.Krishna Bhat is that all the 5 tyres manufactured by opposite party No.2 which was fitted with this new Innova Car that was delivered through first opposite party became useless much earlier to its durability due to its manufacturing defects. Even though the defective tyre that he returned at first for replacement was substituted with a new one after receiving some amount, the defective tyres subsequently taken for replacement were rejected stating that the defect caused to the tyres were not adjustable under warranty. Hence the complainant compelled to purchase 4 new tyres for Rs.18000/- to avoid the risk and danger in using the defective tyres. Even though the complainant caused a lawyer notice through his counsel claiming cost of the replaced tyres and compensation, Opposite party No.2 sent a reply stating false allegations. Hence the complaint. 2. In response to the notices issued to both opposite parties by registered post with acknowledgement due, the first opposite party M/s Amana Toyota, V.P.K. Motors (P) Ltd, Kannur appeared and filed their version. But the second opposite party Good Year India Ltd, Mathura Road, Ballagerh, Faridabad remained absent. Hence they were set exparte. 3. M/s Amana Toyota, VPK Motors (P) Ltd filed their version. According to them the complaint is not maintainable before the Forum since all the transactions were done out side the territorial limits of this Forum and they are only the dealer of the vehicle purchased by the complainant and the tyres are warranted under a separate warranty provided by the tyre manufacturer. Hence it is the responsibility of the tyre manufacturer to rectify/ replace the tyres if there is any manufacturing defect. 4. Complainant filed affidavit in support of his claim repeating what is stated in the complaint. Exts A1 to A8 marked. Both the complainant and Opposite party No.1 heard. At the time of hearing complainant submitted that he does not seek any relief against opposite party No.1 the dealer of the vehicle. 5. Exts A1 is the copy of lawyer notice dated 31-12-2007 issued to both opposite parties. Ext.A2 is the copy of reply notice of opposite party No.1. Ext.A3 is the copy of the reply notice dated 24-03-2008 issued on behalf of opposite party No.2 M/s Good Year India (P) Ltd. In Ext.A3 the contention raised by opposite party No.2 is that the defects in the tyres are due to careless handling of the vehicle. Non maintainability of the complaint within the territorial limits of the forum was one of the ground agitated by opposite party No.1 to defend the claim. The said contention is not acceptable since the vehicle is used in Kasaragod district and the defects of the tyres are seen while the vehicle was in use. Hence part cause of action arose within the territorial limits of this Forum and therefore the complaint is maintainable before this Forum. 6. The defense taken by second opposite party in Ext.A3 reply notice that the tyres became defective due to the ‘careless’ handling of the vehicle is not believable as there is no evidence to prove this aspect. Further the circumstances also negates this contention. Even a common man in the normal circumstances doe not use a brand new costly vehicle like Innova Car recklessly to cause damage to its tyres. In this case complainant Sri.N. Krishna Bhat is a registered medical practitioner by profession who affirmed that he had been owning vehicles since 40 years. Therefore it is hard to believe that the tyres are damaged due to the reckless driving of the vehicle. 7. The fact that all the 5 tyres fitted with the brand new vehicle purchased by Dr.Krishna Bhat became defective very much prior to their normal efficacy itself is a pointer to the fact that the tyres became futile due to certain inherent defects that caused in the manufacturing process. Unfortunately in our country we have not developed a tendency of accepting the defects or defaults. The tendency of accepting the defects or defaults have to be encouraged. In a number of cases it is seen that the manufacturers are spending more than the value of the subject matter involved only to defend the cases taking untenable contentions. The non replacement of defective tyres having a warranty cover is an unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party No.2. Therefore opposite party No.2 is liable to make good the loss sustained to the complainant. 8. The complainant in his affidavit has stated that he has purchased new 4 tyres for Rs.18,000/-. Moreover, the complainant had replaced one tyre out of the 5 tyres after paying 65% purchase price of the tyre. Considering these aspects, the opposite party No.2 Good Year India Limited Haryana is directed to take back the useless tyres of the complainant’s vehicle and to pay a sum of Rs.18000/- (Rupees eighteen thousand only) to the complainant to indemnify the loss sustained to him due to the purchase of new tyres along with a compensation of Rs.3000/- towards the mental agony and sufferings caused to the complainant. The opposite party No.2 is further directed to pay a cost of Rs.2000/-. Opposite party No.1 is exonerated from all liabilities. Time for compliance 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT Exts A1.31-12-07 Copy of lawyer notice. A2. 20-01-2008 reply notice. A3. 24-03-2008 reply notice. A4. Spot Inspection report. A5.Spot Inspection report. A6. (3Nos) Invoices A7.Quality control report. A8.Photos (3 Nos) Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT Pj/ Forwarded by Order SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
......................K.T.Sidhiq
......................P.P.Shymaladevi | | 
