Haryana

Ambala

CC/175/2011

SUSHIL KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S GOYAL AUTOMOBILES - Opp.Party(s)

VISHAL DHAWAN

07 Dec 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

 

                                                           Complaint case no.        : 175 of 2011

                                                           Date of Institution         : 31.05.2011

                                                             Date of decision           : 07.12.2016

 

          Sushil Kumar son of Sh. Ram Dulara, Resident of 929-D, Friends Colony, Near Model Town, Ambala City.

 

                                                                         ……. Complainant.

1.       M/s Goyal Automobiles, Authorized dealer for Bajaj Auto Limited, G.T. Road, Near Milk Plant, Ambala City.

2.       Bajaj Auto Ltd. Headquarters Address- Bajaj Auto Ltd; Akurdi,                                   Pune – 411035.

….…. Respondents.

 

BEFORE:   SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT

                   SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER                             

 

Present:       Sh. Vishal Dhawan, counsel for the complainant.

                   Sh. C.M. Sehgal, counsel for the Ops.

ORDER:

                   In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint is that the complainant had purchased a Bajaj Discover DTS-SI motorcycle on 07.03.2011 which bears chassis no. MD2DSPAZZTPK99960, Engine No. JBUBTK64673 and Registration no. HR-01AC-0464 and covered with warranty. At very beginning, the said motorcycle started giving problems i.e. leaking engine oil. The complainant visited to OP no. 1 for removal of the said defect and it was told by respondent no. 1 that leaking was due to some lose nut and during the 1^st service it will be removed. On 18.04.2011 during the 1^st service of the motorcycle the mechanic namely Baljeet Singh of OP no. 1 tightens the nut and rubbed the liquid gum over it. However, the said defect could not be rectified and the engine oil leaking continued. The complainant made a complaint on Bajaj Auto Customer Care vide complaint no. CR-72237. On 22.04.2011, complainant visited OP no. 1 and he told the complainant that in order to remove the manufacturing defect of leaking engine oil, want to open the some part of engine of motorcycle and affix seal therein and the Manager of OP no. 1 assure hi, that in case the defect would not cured then in that eventuality the motorcycle of complainant would be replaced with new one. After that the entire engine of motorcycle of complainant was opened and operated by OP no. 1 but no use. The complainant again made a complaint on Bajaj Auto Customer Care vide complaint no. CR-72242 dated 23.04.2011 but the Ops failed to do ractified the manufacturing defect of vehicle in question. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                Upon notice, Ops 2 appeared and filed written statement submitting that the complainant visited the opposite party no. 1 on 18.04.2011 for first time to get free service and found some leakage of engine oil from the chamber. The leakage was fully stopped and the complainant was advised to come on 21.04.2011 as the expert technician will check the motorcycle for satisfaction of complainant. The motorcycle was checked in presence of the complainant and no manufacturing defect was found in the motorcycle. The new packing was provided to stop the leakage of oil from the chamber and defect was duly rectified. Hence, the present complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3                 To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure C-X  along with documents as annexure C-1 to C-8 and close his evidence. On the other hand, respondent has tendered his affidavit as Annexure RX and close his evidence.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and carefully gone through the case file. The case of the complainant is that the motorcycle so purchased by him from Op NO. 1 became defective time and again and dispite making complaint to OP NO. 2 i.e. Manufacturer of motorcycle in question no solution came out as such the counsel for the complainant argued that the motor cycle is having manufacture defect and to replace the motorcycle with new one as well as to provide compensation etc.

                   On the other hand, counsel for Ops has argued that as and when the motorcycle brought to their work-shop, It was well attended and no problem left unturned in the motorcycle. He further argued that the motorcycle was also got checked in the presence of complainant from an expert person who found no manufacturing defect in the motorcycle.

                   Complainant to prove his case has placed on record Service Job Card dated 18.04.2011 (Annexure C-4) and he has also placed reliance on documents Annexure C-6 written by Op no. 1 to complainant mentioning there in that to bring the motorcycle to their workshop and needful will be done of his satisfaction.

                   From the documents placed on record by complainant it is                        nowhere proved that the vehicle was having any manufacturing defect. Perusal of documents Annexure C-4 also does not depict that the vehicle was having any manufacturing defect rather it shows that a petty work like chance of oil and oil filter was done in the motorcycle. Further perusal of Annexure C-6 reveals that the OP has asked the complainant to bring his motorcycle to their workshop and they will do all the necessary repair in the motorcycle but the complainant failed to produce the vehicle to the workshop of OP. The present letter has been written by OP No. 1 to complainant prior to filing of the present complaint which means that the Ops were eager to rectify the defects of the motorcycle but the complainant himself has not co-operated with OP.

5.                In view of above discussion, we are of the view that the vehicle does not have any manufacturing defect and the complaint is devoid of merits. Accordingly, the complaint dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

Announced on :07.12.2016                                             Sd/-

                                                                              (D.N. ARORA)

                                                                                       President

 

                      Sd/-

     (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                       Member