Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/481/2023

DEEPAK SHARMA - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S HBS MOTORS PVT LTD - Opp.Party(s)

24 May 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/481/2023
Date of Institution	:	5/10/2023
Date of Decision	:	24/5/2024

 

Mr. Deepak Sharma Son of Sh. Vidya Rattan Sharma aged 43 years resident of House NO 104-C, Raipur Khurd, Near Treatment Plant, Raipur Khurd Chandigarh -160003

… Complainant

Versus

(1) M/S HBS Motors Pvt Ltd Plot No 350, Ind Area, Phase-2, Panchkula through its Director/ Authorized Signatory MANIT (MD), through its Authorized Signatory NEERAJ (GM)

(2) Manufacturer M/S MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA LTD, Plot No A-1/1 Chaken Industrial Area, Phase IV-VI 1: NigojeChakan Taluka Khed, DISTT PUNE- 410501, MAHARASHTRA (INDIA), through its MD.

.  … Opposite Parties

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER MEMBER

                       

ARGUED BY		Complainant in person.
		Sh. Gaurav Bhardwaj, Advocate for OP No.1.
		Sh. Subhash Chand, Advocate for OP No.2.

Per SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, Member

     Briefly stated  the complainant  on the misleading assurances of Ops regarding mileage purchased Mahindra XUV 300 base model petrol from hBS Motor Pvt. Ltd. on 22.2.2022. It is alleged that the misleading information about the fuel efficiency of the above said car and false details about the three year insurance was given to the complainant by  OP No.1 while purchasing the car. The car dealer claimed that the mileage of the car would be around 15- 17 in the local drive and 19-20 on the highway. But when the complainant started using the vehicle he found that the average local is only 9 to 10 km where as on highway it is only 11 to 12 which is far less than what the company claims and also misguided the complainant about the insurance which company generated for 3 years. According to the dealer 1st year 100% claim will be given on any accident or fault in the car. Whereas, in the second year 70% claim will be given and in the third year 50% claim will be given. When in the second year complainant went to the service centre he was in rear shock when the service manager told him that in the second and third year the insurance will give no claim because it is a third party insurance. Alleging the aforesaid act of Opposite Parties deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part, this complaint has been filed.

2. The Opposite Party NO.1 in its reply stated that the complaint is totally abuse of process of law,  and  there is neither deficiency in service nor any unfair trade practice on the part of the answering O.P.no.1 and all the allegations and averments in the complaint are false and baseless against O.P.no.1. In fact after about 8 months of purchase of the car and its registration, the complainant started pressurizing the O.Pno.1 to replace his vehicle with a diesel variant, which is not possible as he has himself purchased a petrol variant. The complainant then started threatening the O.P.no.1 regarding his position as TV Reporter. He said he will malign the reputation in media if the vehicle is not replaced with diesel variant. He has filed police complaint also but he was not able to get a favorable response in his favour and then he started raising the false issues of low mileage. All other allegations made in the complaint has been  denied being wrong.
3. OP No.2 in its reply stated that no cause of action has arisen against the answering opposite party and in favour of the complainant, as the complainant has failed to make out a case for any deficiency on the part of answering opposite party, the instant complaint is nothing but abuse of process of law and as far as the subject vehicle is concerned the sale and service of the vehicle is entirely the prerogative of the dealer, manufacturer plays no role in it. The liability of manufacturer is limited to the terms and conditions of the warranty policy. The Opposite Party No. 2 is not responsible for any of the act, omissions or commission of any act by its dealers. Thus in view of the abovesaid, the complainant is not the consumer of answering Opposite Party. Denying any deficiency on its part a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.
4. Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated.
5. Contesting parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and gone through the record of the case.
7. The main grievance of the complainant is that  the vehicle purchased from OP is not giving mileage  as claimed by the OP and moreover the OP has provided him only third party insurance and not the comprehensive policy.
8. On perusal of   Annexure C-7 on the which the complainant has relied upon, is the information gathered from google search and the same is not the part of manual of the manufacturer of the car and the complainant has failed to adduce any documentary evidence/information from the manual of car, provided by of the  OP. Hence,   the document Annexure C-7 based on which the complainant made the mileage claim  cannot be relied upon.
9. So far as the issue regarding the insurance, it is observed that the policy issued contains all the details and has been issued as per IRDA rules. Every insurance policy is issued with the concurrence of the car owner and if the complainant had any issue, he should have returned the policy within the free look period. But the complainant has failed to prove on record that he ever approached the OP within free look period regarding his grievance with regard to the policy. Hence, the complainant has miserably failed to prove his case.
10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the present consumer complaint, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
11. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed off.
12.      Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

			sd/- [Pawanjit Singh]
			President
			Sd/-
			[Surjeet Kaur] Member Sd/-
24/5/2024			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
mp			Member