O R D E R
R.Vijayakumar, Member.
This is a complaint filed Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act. The complainant is filed for getting direction to opposite parties for rectification of entire defects of vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-23/6517 and to return it to the complainant with show room condition and for compensation along with cost.
Briefly summarized facts of the case is that the complainant had purchased a Exo-Cosmic-1 Scooter from first opposite party on 07.04.2009. Both the Manager of the first opposite party and second opposite party made to believe the complainant that the scooter is free from all manufacturing defects. The third opposite party assured the warranty and prompt service through their authorized dealers including the first opposite party.
After two months from the date of delivery the scooter showed some mechanical defects and the same was entrusted to first opposite party for repair through second opposite party. But without finding the actual mechanical defect, first opposite party
repaired the scooter partially and returned the vehicle to the complainant. The said vehicle was continuously indicating mechanical problems including break down. The complainant approached second opposite party for its maintenance but no positive step was taken by second opposite party.
Subsequently the complainant entrusted the vehicle to the first opposite party through second opposite party for its repair. Afterwards the service consultant examined the vehicle and informed that the defects could be rectified only on availability of some spare parts which were shortage in their hands. The
(3)
complainant made several enquiries but the opposite parties skulked with lame excuses. Due to the mechanical defect, the purpose for purchase of that vehicle also is defected. The complainant sent legal notice to all opposite parties calling upon to rectify the entire defects of the said vehicle. Even after receipt of the legal notice they failed to settle the matter. The sale of defective vehicle and non-attendance of its repair and services are unfair trade practice and deficiency in service from the part of opposite parties. Due to that deficiency the purpose of vehicle was also defeated and the complainant sustained financial loss and mental agony. Hence the complaint is filed for getting relief.
Even though sufficient opportunities have been given to opposite parties one and two, they remained absent. Hence set exparte. The third opposite party entered appearance contenting the allegations and stating that the complaint is vexatious, false and to be dismissed in lamine. Subsequently third opposite party also remained absent continuously and they also set exparte.
The complainant filed affidavit. PW1 examined. Exts.P1 to P3 marked.
The points that would arise for consideration are :-
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service from the part of opposite party?
2. Compensation and cost.
Points (1) & (2)
As the opposite parties remained absent, we are constrained to relay upon the evidence adduced by the complainant.
(4)
We have perused all the documents in detail. On perusal of all the documents we find that there is deficiency in service from the part of opposite parties. The points found accordingly.
In the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties to rectify the entire defects of vehicle bearing no.KL-23/65 and to return the same to the complainant in show room condition. The opposite parties are further directed to pay compensation Rs.3500/- and cost Rs.1500/-.
Dated this the 30th day of November 2010.
K.Vijayakumaran :Sd/-
Adv.Ravi Susha :Sd/-
R.Vijayakumar :Sd/-
// Forwarded by Order //
Senior Superintendent
INDEX
List of witnesses for the complainant
PW1 - Aliyarukunju
List of documents for the complainant
P1 - Copy of Reg.Certificate
P2 - Postal Receipt
P3 - Advocate notice
