Delhi

New Delhi

OC/1961/2003

Romi Sikand - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Maruti Udyog Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

03 Sep 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/1961/03                     Dated:

In the matter of:

MS. ROMI SIKAND

A-1/12, SHAKTI NAGAR EXTN.

NEW DELHI.

 

                   ……..COMPLAINANT

 

VERSUS

1.       THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,

MARUTI UDYOG LIMITED,

11^TH FLOOR, JEEVAN PARAKASH BLDG.

 25, KASTURBA GANDHI MARG,

NEW DELHI-110001.

 

2.       M/S. COMPETENET AUTOMOBILES COMPANY LTD. COMPETENT HOUSE, F-14, CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI.

 

3.       M/S. MARUTI SALES AND SERVICES DELHI, C-119, NARAINA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-1, NEW DELHI-28

 

 

………. OPPOSITE PARTY

 

 

 

 

 

ORDER

 

President: C K CHATURVEDI

 

                The complainant alleged manufacturing defect in the Maruti Esteem Car, purchased by her in 2002, from Competent Motor Co. Ltd., Co. (OP-2) for Rs.4,97,000/-, manufacturered by OP-1.   It is alleged that she noticed defect in the painting of car just after 13 days and she pointed out this to OP-1, which agreed and assured that repainting would remove/cover the difference in paint.  It is alleged that despite repainting it did not match.  She alleged some other defects, which are not mentioned in the complainant and stated that workshop gave free service to replace the same.  She demanded value of the car by this complaint.  The OP-1 in its reply has stated that painting defects does not significantly affect the function of car and the defects do not quality for replacement of car.  It is stated that she has failed to prove the manufacturing defect affecting functioning of car.  The reply of OP-2, being dealer is formal.

        We have considered the material on record various job cards, the evidence and case of the pe    None of the job cards during free  service proved mention any functional defects, which was not attended.  In our considered view, it is not a case of replacement of car or return or value of car even at the time of purchase, nor now after 15 years.  It is unfortunate that the case has remained pending with Forum so long.  Never-the-less,  the painting work being not perfect, the deficiency by way of imperfection is made out, which caused annoyance and failed satisfaction of a new car needing repainting.  Considering all the aspects we hold manufacturing OP-1, liable for poor paint works requiring repainting. We award a compensation of Rs.50,000/- with 9% interest from date of purchase till payment for this imperfection and loss of satisfaction to complainant.  No separate litigation expenses are awarded in view of interest awarded or compensation..

OP-1 is directed to comply the order with within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free

of cost.

Pronounced in open Court on 03.09.2015.

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

      

 (RITU GARODIA)

MEMBER