Delhi

New Delhi

CC/389/2018

Hemant Jain - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Regional Manager Maruti Udhog Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

16 May 2019

ORDER

 

                                 

                                                 CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

                                                    (DISTT. NEW DELHI),

‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

                                 NEW DELHI-110001

 

 

Case No.C.C./1794/2008                                                  Dated:

In the matter of:

Hemant Jain

R/o 3369/2, Gali No.-2

R.P. Road IInd Gandhi Nagar

Delhi-110031                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           …… Complainant

       

Versus

1. Regional Manager Maruti Udhog Ltd.

Hansalya Building 6^th floor

Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001

 

2. Maruti Competent Automobiles Co. Ltd.

H.O. Competents House F-14, Connaught Place,

New Delhi-110001

3. Maruti Competent Automobiles Co. Ltd.

Plot No.-3 Gazipur Delhi East-110092.

                                                                                                                           …….Opposite Parties

 

 

PRESIDENT-ARUN KUMAR ARYA

ORDER

       

            Complaint under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed alleging that the complainant purchased a new vehicle Wagon R –VXI on 17/09/2007.  The said vehicle was not functioning properly since its  purchase.  The complainant sent a written complaint dated 08/10/2007 and also met Sh. P.N.Babeja an officer of the OP who assured the complainant to visit the Workshop at Gazipur and all the problems will be resolved.  On assurance of the officer of the OP-2, the complainant visited the Gazipur Workshop accordingly, who kept the car and assured to do the needful within 2-3 hours.  But in the evening it was informed that the wiring was not available and assured the complainant that the vehicle will be delivered on 11/10/07.  When the vehicle was not delivered, the complainant gave written complaint on 10/10/07 to the OP-1 followed by other complaint dated 12/10/07 to Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.  The complainant again visited the OP-1 on 19/10/07 and gave written complaint in the name of Regional Manager Maruti Udyog also informing that the vehicle is lying with OP-2 since 08/10/07 and they are doing nothing.  Despite continuous follow up personal visits and giving written complaints nothing was done and the problem in the vehicle persisted.  The complainant finally personally visited on 25/11/08 for repair of the vehicle otherwise he will approach the consumer court.  The complainant has made the following prayer:-

“The OP he directed to refund/pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 33,51,104/- along with interest there on 24% from 17-09-2007 or else the vehicle be replaced with new vehicle, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- on account of mental agony, pain and suffering, loss of business including difference in interest charged and another sum of Rs. 25,000/- being the cost of present litigation.”

The OPs were noticed.  On 04/05/2009, none appeared on behalf of OP-2 &  OP-3 and accordingly they were proceeded ex-parte.  The OP-2 & OP-3 moved application to set aside the ex-parte orders which was allowed by the predecessor Bench during relevant period on 24/12/09 subject to cost.

OP-1 had filed written statement/version to the complaint denying all the allegation, stating that the complainant took this vehicle to workshop of oP-3 on 08/10/2007 for obtaining running repairs and the OP-3 upon the inspection of vehicle found that the wiring harness and floor carpet were badly damaged by rats due to complainant’s negligence and the same was acknowledged by the complainant in the job card, even though the same was not covered under warranty. It is further stated that the OPs replaced wiring harness and floor carpet as a gesture of goodwill on free of cost basis. It is further stated that on 17/12/2008 the complainant took his vehicle to the workshop of OP and the OP-3 checked the vehicle and replaced fuel tank pipe and did washing and AC check and no alleged defects were observed in the vehicle. All the allegations against the OP-1 has been denied and prayer to dismiss the complaint with cost was made.

The complainant filed rejoinder to the written statement of OP-1.

Parties have filed their respective evidence by way of affidavit affirming their respective text in the pleading.

We have considered the material placed before us and the arguments of the parties with the relevant provisions of law.

As per the record placed before us it is clear that the vehicle was purchased from OP-2 on 17/09/2007. As per the Bill/Cash Memo, Job Sheet there were continuous complaints with the vehicle. Job sheet/job card, bills have not been disputed by the OP, however, the alleged problem with the vehicle has been denied, while simultaneously stating that there was no manufacturing defect in the vehicle and that the repair was carried out to the satisfaction of the complainant. It is also not disputed by the OPs that the vehicle was brought to OP-3 work shop at some occasions, The vehicle remained in the workshop for 3 to 12 days in the workshop.

In this premise of facts & discussions, we hold the OP-3 to be deficient in service in not rectifying the persistent defect despite frequent visits to the OP’s work shop. The prayer of the complainant to replace the vehicle with the new vehicle at this stage cannot be allowed. Holding the OP-3 to be guilty of deficiency in service, we direct as under:-

1. To pay sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for harassment mental agony faced by the complainant.
2. To pay sum of Rs. 10,000/- as the litigation cost.

The order shall be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of this order. If the said amount is not paid by the OP within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order, simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum shall be payable by OP on the awarded amount from the date of this order till recovery of the said amount.

A copy each of this order each be sent to both parties free of cost by post.

Orders be also sent to www.confonet.nic.in.

File be consigned to record room.

Pronounced in open Forum on 16/05/2019.       

 

 

                                                       (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                                                                 PRESIDENT

(NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                                      (H M VYAS)

                          MEMBER                                                                                 MEMBER