BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.82/2015

DATED ON THIS THE 5^th August 2016

      Present:  1) Sri. H.M.Shivakumara Swamy

B.A., LLB., - PRESIDENT   

    2) Smt. M.V.Bharathi                    

                                   B.Sc., LLB., -  MEMBER

                     3) Sri. Devakumar.M.C.                  

                                                          B.E., LLB.,    - MEMBER

Sri Devakumar.M.C.

Member

1.     The complainant has filed the complaint under section 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986, against the opposite party, alleging the deficiency in service and seeking direction to pay the damages of Rs.10,500/- as compensation for the loss and repair charges of his two wheeler vehicle and Rs.80,000/- compensation for mental agony and physical pain with such other reliefs.
2.    The complainant used to fill the engine oil to his two wheeler vehicle, everyday at opposite party’s petrol bunk, from January 2013.  The vehicle suffered problems frequently.  The complainant alleged that the problem caused was due to filling of less quantity of engine oil to his vehicle.  On noticing the filling of less quantity of engine oil, the complainant lodged a complaint to the weights and measurements authority, alleging filling of less quantity of engine oil to all the two wheelers, who on holding an enquiry, imposed fine, for violation of rules.  As such, alleging the filling of less quantity of engine oil, as deficiency in service by opposite party, filed the complaint seeking reliefs.
3.     The opposite party submits that, the engine oil is not filled to a vehicle everyday and denied the visit of the complainant to fill up engine oil.  The opposite party denied the allegation of filling of less quantity of engine oil, which caused problem in the two wheeler.  Op says the fine imposed by the authority was for keeping oil sachet in open condition, not for filling of less quantity of oil, as alleged.  The complainant made baseless allegations to make unlawful gain, hence prays for dismissal of the complainant.
4.     To establish the facts, both parties filed affidavit.  The complainant relied on documents.  Written arguments filed by both.  Heard both the counsels and on perusing the material on record, matter posted for orders.
5.     The points arose for our consideration are:-

1. Whether the complainant establishes the deficiency in service on the part of opposite party, in filling less quantity of engine oil to his two wheeler vehicle everyday and same has caused the engine problem, which lead to incur repair charges, thereby he is entitled for the reliefs sought?
2. What order?

6.    Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1 :- In the negative.

Point No.2 :- As per final order for the following

:: R E A S O N S ::

7.    Point No.1:- The complainant claimed himself as a press reporter, alleged the filling of less quantity of engine oil to his two wheeler vehicle has caused problem in the engine, which resulted him getting repaired the same repeatedly, by incurring huge amount between January 2013 to September 2013.  The complainant alleged that, the authority had imposed fine for selling of less quantity of engine oil.  As such, the complainant alleged deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and sought for the reliefs.
8.    The opposite party contended that, there is no need to fill in the engine oil everyday, to the two wheeler vehicle.  The complainant failed to disclose the particulars of the vehicle.  The opposite party also denied the allegation of filling of less quantity of engine oil.  The opposite party contended that, the allegation are baseless, and made only to make unlawful gain.  Hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
9.   The complainant fail to establish the allegation of filling of less quantity of engine oil to his two wheeler vehicle by the opposite party.  The complainant also fail to establish that, his vehicle has been repaired repeatedly by incurring expenditure.  The complainant does not disclose the particulars of his vehicle.  It is true that, the authority had imposed fine for having kept opened the engine oil sachet.  Hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.  As such, the complainant is not entitled for any reliefs sought.  Accordingly, the point no.1 is answered in the negative.

10. Point No.2:- In view of the above observations, we proceed to pass the following

:: O R D E R ::

1. The complaint is dismissed.
2.  Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules.

(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on this the 5^th day of August 2016)