Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/298/2013

M/s Bhoomi Car Point - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Khanna Car Plaza Pvt.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sunil Kamboj

26 Feb 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR AT JAGADHRI.

                                                                                    Complaint No. 298   of 2013.

                                                                                    Date of Institution: 30.4.2013

                                                                                    Date of Decision: 26.02.2016.

M/s Bhoomi Car Point, Yamuna Nagar, through its Partner Shri Pardeep Kumar aged 32 years son of Sh. Dharam Pal.   

                                                                                                                                                                   …Complainant.

                                                                   Versus

 

1. M/S Khanna Car Plaza Pvt. Ltd. Opp. Agarsen College, Chhachhrauli road, Jagadhri, distt. Yamuna Nagar, through its Proprietor. 
2. M/s Jaeco Diesels, SCF 344-345, New Motor Market, Manimajra (Chandigarh) UT, through its Proprietor.  

                                                                                                                                                                   …Respondents.

BEFORE:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: Sh. Sunil Kamboj, Advocate, counsel for complainant.

              Sh. Rajan Rohilla, Service Manager for OP No.1.

              Sh. Karan Jaiswal, S.O. for Op No.2.  

 

ORDER

1.                     Complainant Pardeep Kumar has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection 1986 praying therein that the respondents (hereinafter referred as OPs) be directed to refund Rs. 999/- and Rs. 4000/- Charged illegally and unlawfully alongwith interest and further to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses.    

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that complainant was having one Car Verna bearing registration No. DL3CAL-7841 which was started to give problem in starting due to that, complainant met incharge/Manager of OP No.1 workshop. The mechanic of OP No.1 checked the car through computerized machine as well as manually and stated that the “Nozzles” of the car are defected. The complainant demanded the computer checking report but the employees of Op No.1 refused to supply the same. At the same time the employees of OP No.1 directed the complainant to approach the Op No.2 Jeaco Diesels Chandigarh for repair of said Nozzles   and handed over a parcel of four Nozzles to the complainant after removing from the car of the complainant. According to the suggestion and direction of OP No.1, the complainant was going to Chandigarh, when he reached at Ambala he received a telephonic call from OP No.2 who called the complainant as early as possible, which surprised the complainant that the said firm i.e. Op No.2 has already knowledge regarding the work and moreover, there was no foul smell to the complainant, regarding collusion of OP No.1 and the said firm at Chandigarh. The complainant reached there on 22.3.2013 and showed the said Nozzles to the employee of Op No.2, after investigation they stated that four Nozzles have become defected and advised to purchase all four new Nozzles. OP No.2 have also charged Rs. 4000/- from the complainant vide bill No. 11246 dated 22.3.2013 for inspection. The complainant got suspected for the work of said firm and requested to return the Nozzles upon which they packed the four Nozzles in box and returned the same to the complainant. Thereafter, complainant took the said Nozzles to Dehradun Premier Motors (P) Ltd. Haridwar Byepass road, Ajabpur Kalan, Dehradun and showed the said Nozzles to them and on inspection, it was disclosed to the complainant that some parts are missing from the two Nozzles and other two Nozzles are O.K. They repaired the defective two Nozzles and charged Rs. 3000/- vide Bill No. 671 dated 23.3.2013. After repair, the complainant took the Nozzles and got fitted the same in the car from OP No.1 and paid an amount of Rs. 999/- vide Bill No. B201301317 dated 28.3.2013 but the problem regarding long self starting was not solved and then on investigation it was revealed that the reil sensor of the car was weak.

3.                     As there was problem in reil sensor in the car but the Op No.1 alongwith OP No.2, have kept the complainant in dark and with a view to extort money from the complainant they have given wrong report, whereas there was no problem in the Nozzles rather the problem was in reil sensor and Op No.1 has wrongly charged Rs. 999/- from the complainant and OP No.2 has charged Rs. 4000/-. Besides this, also removed some parts from two Nozzles, due to which the complainant had to pay more than Rs.3000/- for repair of the same and further fitting of the Nozzles. Even the complainant has also spent the amount on convince etc. Thus the OPs No.1 & 2 in collusion with each other have played an unfair trade practice and extorted money from the complainant and  wants to extract further huge amount. Hence, this complaint.   

4.                     Upon notice, OP No.1 appeared through representative Sh. Rajan Rohilla Senior Manager and filed its written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as complaint is false and vexatious, no deficiency in service and on merit, it has been mentioned that complainant is not owner of the car in question as the M/s Creamy Foods Ltd. Delhi is the real owner of the car and further it has been admitted that car in question was checked through G.Scan system and found that the fuel supply problem in the car. Firstly Fuel Injectors need to calibrate as per procedure that job not done at our workshop. The complainant demanded to give him all the injectors and he calibrate it from outside. So, the OP No.1 does not know from where and how the injector gets repaired. It has been further mentioned that complainant admitted himself that two injectors were defective. The injectors supplied by the complainant were fitted and diagnosed the problem of reil sensor in the car. Lastly, it has been denied that OP No.1 kept the complainant in dark. Hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of Op No.1 and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

5.                     OP No.2 filed its written statement through its representative Sh. Karan Jaiswal, Sales Officer, mentioning therein that four injectors were received on 21.3.2013 from M/s Bhoomi Car Point as the same was directed by the M/s Khanna Car Plaza Pvt. Ltd. due to non availability of test facility for Nozzles with them. As the complainant was directed to by M/s Khanna Car Plaza i.e. OP No.1, the call was made to guide the complainant in terms of good trade practice and it does not meaning any foul smell or collusion. It has been further stated that it was well intimated to the complainant that Rs. 4000/- will be charged as testing fee and the estimate charges and quotation for repair will be given separately only after testing on machine. On testing it was informed to the complainant that as the parts are not readily available/ beyond economical repair and an option was available to purchase our recon injectors for exchange of old injectors at the cost of Rs. 38,000/- for four injectors with three months warranty. The MRP of original OE injector is Rs.1,11,708/- and Bosch injectors is Rs.57,000/- for four injectors. The complainant refused for both the options. It has been further mentioned that injectors were sent back through our representative at the cost of Op No.2 from Chandigarh to Jagadhri with the instructions to collect Rs. 4000/- as testing fee from the complainant and quotation No. 11246 dated 22.3.2013 was sent through our representative. Injectors were handed over to the complainant but the complainant refused to give Rs. 4000/- and started quarrel with our representative and threatened. As the complainant has not paid Rs. 4000/- which were genuine testing charges on machine and the bill mentioned in the complaint is only quotation. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint as there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of Op No.2.

6.                     To prove the case, counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Annexure CX and documents such as Bill of investigation charges of four injectors as Annexure C-1, Cash memo dated 23.3.2013 amounting to Rs. 3000/- as annexure C-2, Bill/Invoice dated 28.3.2013 amounting to Rs. 999/- as Annexure C-3 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

7.                     On the other hand, representative of Op No.1 tendered his affidavit as Annexure RW1/A  and documents such as Authority letter as Annexure R-1, copy of invoice dated 28.3.2013 as Annexure R-2 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.1. However, authorized representative of OP No.2 tendered into evidence his affidavit as Annexure RW2/A and documents such as Photo copy of invoice dated 23.3.2013 as Annexure R-4 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.2.

8.                     We have heard both the parties at length and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file very minutely and carefully.  After going through the entire pleadings of both the parties as well as documents placed on file, we are of the considered view that almost all the allegations leveled by the complainant, are not rebutted by Op No.2 as he has specifically admitted in para No.1 to 4 of  his written statement that complainant visited the Op No.2 on the advise and guidelines of Op No.1 for getting repair the Nozzles of the car. The OP No.2 has also admitted in para No.3 of his written statement, that after testing, they were informed to the complainant that as parts are not readily available/ beyond economical repair and an option is available to purchase our recon injectors for exchange of old injectors at the cost of Rs. 38000/- for four injectors with three months warranty. The MRP of original OE Injector is Rs. 1,11,708/- and Bosch Injectors is Rs. 57,000/- for four injectors. The complainant refused for both the options. Further OP No 2 has admitted that they will charge Rs. 4000/- as testing fee and repair charges will be separately. Meaning thereby that as per opinion of the OP No.2 all the four injectors of the car in question were defective and OP No.2 wants to extort the money from the complainant by giving two options as mentioned in para No.3 of the reply filed by him (OP No.2). On the other hand, the same injectors were checked and repaired by Premier Motors Private Ltd. Dheradhun (UP) on 23.3.2013 just at the cost of Rs. 2800/- which is evident from Annexure C-2. Even two injectors out of four were found in working order  i.e. were O.K. The version of Op No.2 is also seems falsify that complainant has not paid Rs.4000/- whereas it is evident from Annexure C-1, So-called quotation/Performa bill issued on 22.3.2013 in the name of Bhoomi Car Point, Yamuna Nagar i.e. complainant by OP No.2, as in this bill, in the opening line, it has been mentioned that cash in hand So, it cannot be said that this is only quotation as there was no need to mention as cash in the quotation.

9.                     We have also gone through the reply filed by Op No.1 wherein we noted that Op No.1 is contesting the complaint only on the point that the complainant was not the owner of the car in question and the car in question was stands in the name of Creamy Foods Ltd. Delhi whereas this plea of the OP No.1 is not tenable, as from the perusal of delivery cash receipt issued by registered car Dealer Welfare Association, Yamuna Nagar (Annexure C-5) it is evident that complainant Pardeep Kumar son of Dharampal C/o Bhoomi Car Point purchased the said car from M/s Creamy Food Private Ltd. on 20.3.2013 and further it is also evident from the copy of Partnership deed (Annexure C-4 ) that complainant Pardeep Kumar is a partner alongwith Balinder Kumar of M/s Bhoomi Car Points i.e. complainant firm.

10.                   OP No.1 has also admitted in para No.2 of reply on merit that they checked the car through G.Scan System and found problem in fuel supply, which firstly fuel injectors needs to be calibrated as per procedure. Meaning thereby that the OP No.1 declared the Nozzles in question defective and advised the complainant to get it repaired from OP No.2 whereas they have not any facility to check the said Nozzles/injectors. It shows that the mechanic of OP No.1 was not so qualified as they could not observe the actual fault in the car in question and gave wrong advise to the complainant due to which the complainant has suffered mental agony, harassment as well as paid Rs.4000/- to Op No.2, besides the expenses of coming and going on, to Chandigarh and Dehradun. It was the luck of the complainant that he succeeds to save his huge amount as demanded by Op No.2 in collusion with OP No.1 on account of replacement /exchange of alleged defective Nozzles.

11.                   In the circumstances noted above, we are of the considered view that OP No. 1 & 2 has committed unfair trade practice with the complainant. As such, the complainant is entitled for relief.

12.                   Resultantly, we partly allow the complaint of complainant and direct the OP No.2 to refund a sum of Rs.4000/- charged as testing fee alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 22.3.2013 till its realization and OPs are further directed to pay Rs. 5000/- each (i.e. total Rs. 10,000/-) to the complainant as compensation for mental agony and harassment as well as litigation expenses. Order be complied within 30 days after preparation of copy of this order failing which complainant shall be entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum as per law. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced: 26.02.2016.

                                                                        (ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                        PRESIDENT

 

 

                                                                        (S.C.SHARMA )

                                                                        MEMBER