Delhi

New Delhi

CC/894/2013

Jiya Lal Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Suzuki Motorcycles India Pvt.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

07 Dec 2018

ORDER

 

 

 CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

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

I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC.894/2013                                      Dated:

In the matter of:

Jiya Lal Sharma S/o B.D.Sharma,

R/o H.No.2346, Sec.14,

Hissar-125001(Haryana)

 

Through: Attorney Holder.

 

Sh. Rajesh Kumar S/o Sh. Radhey Shyam,

VPO  Behiba, Teh. Meham,  

Distt. Rohtak(Haryana).

 

Also at:

J-101, Palika Awas,

Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi-110023.                    

                                                     ……..COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

1. M/s Suzuki Motorcycles India Pvt. Ltd.,

Village Kherki Dhaula,

Badshah Pur, NH-8, Link Road,

Gurgaon -122003.

 

2. M/s Suzuki Motorcycles India Pvt. Ltd.,

Sales & Marketing Registered Office,

         2^nd Floor, Plot No.1,

Nelson Mandela Road,

Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070.

 

3. M/s Malik Auto Works Pvt. Ltd.,

Barwala Road, Hissar-125001(Haryana).

 

4. M/s Suzuki Motorcycles India Pvt. Ltd., 

          Rohtak-124001.(Haryana)

 

5. Sh. Shyam Motors,

Near Bus Stand, Najafgarh Road,

       Bahadurgarh-0124507(Haryana)

                                                                                                                                                ….......Opposite Parties

 

ARUN KUMAR ARYA, PRESIDENT

ORDER

The gist of the complaint is  that  the  complainant purchased Suzaki Access Motorcycle on 20.2.2010 from OP-3 and paid a sum of Rs.43,000/- against the invoice.  It is alleged that as per the instructions contained in user manual, the complainant used to get  his vehicle serviced with OP-5.  In the month of December 2012, the vehicle was serviced by OP-5 but just after the service the frequent problems developed in the vehicle and almost every day the complainant used to take the vehicle to the service station.  On various occasions due to defective service the complainant was bound to send the vehicle for service to OP-5 and the last service of vehicle was done on 24.8.2013 in which the OP-5 intentionally recorded the mileage as 9994 km. instead of 8994 km. After the service, the vehicle started emitted huge black smoke.  He complained about the same to OP-5 but OP-5 assured that this was normal process and after running few kilometers. The release of the smoke would stop.  It is submitted that on 27.8.2013 the engine got seized and as such complainant rushed to OP-5 who asked the complainant’s daughter not to visit again as engine got seized due to manufacturing defect.  It is further alleged that the complainant got repaired his vehicle from private mechanic and paid a sum of Rs.7,000/- in cash.  It is further submitted that as OP-1, 2 & 3 had sold defective vehicle to the complainant and OP-4 & 5 did not provide good services to him, hence all the OPs are liable for deficiency in service,  hence this complaint.

2.        Complaint has been contested by OP-1, 2,3 & 5.  They denied any deficiency in services on their part.  In their preliminary objection, OPs have strongly challenged the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum, hence, needs to be decided first. 

3.         It has been pleaded by OP that the Registered office of the OP is situated is Gurugram, hence, the District Forum; Gurugram will have the jurisdiction and can entertain the present complaint.   On the issue of territorial jurisdiction it is argued by the complainant that a copy of owner’s manual supplied along  with the vehicle by the OP Co.  shows that the all the disputes will be subject to the jurisdiction of New Delhi.  Hence, this Forum has jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the present complaint.

4.         The perusal of the file shows that the address of OP-2 i.e Vasant Kunj, New Delhi does not fall within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum.  On the issue of territorial jurisdiction, we are guided by the Hon’ble National Commission in Revision Petition bearing No.575/18 was filed by the petitioner Sh. Prem Joshi against the above noted order of Hon’ble State Commission dated 1.11.2017 titled as Prem Joshi Vs. Jurasik Park Inn, in which the Hon’ble National Commission held as under on 1/3/2018:-

“In terms of Section 11 of the Consumer Protection Act, a complaint can be instituted inter-alia in a District Forum within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the cause of action only or in part arises.  The case of the complainant is that the ticket for visiting the amusement park was purchased by him online in his office in Karol Bagh and it is the District Forum at Tis Hazari has territorial jurisdiction over the mattes in which cause of action arises in Karol Bagh.  The cause of action is bundle of facts which a person will have to prove in order to succeed in the Lis.  Therefore, in order to succeed in the consumer complaint, the complainant will necessarily have to prove the purchase of the ticket in entering amusement park situated at Sonepat.  Since the tickets was allegedly purchased at the office of the complainant situated in Karol Bagh, the Distict Forum having territorial jurisdiction over Karol Bagh area would have the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the consumer complaint”.

 

5.       As per the owner’s manual supplied along  with the vehicle by the OP Co.  all the disputes will be subject to the jurisdiction of New Delhi. The office of OP 2 is situated at Vasnat Kunj, New Delhi , hence the the District Forum having Territorial Jurisdiction over Vasnat Kunj, New Delhi would have the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.  

6.         Therefore, we hold that this District Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the present complaint in the light of the judgment of Hon’ble National Commission titled as Prem Joshi Vs. Jurasik Park Inn in Revision Petition No.575/18 and the legal position discussed above.  Let the complaint be returned to the complainant along with documents for presenting before the concerned District Forum in accordance with Law. A copy of the complaint be retained for records. Complaint is accordingly, disposed off in above terms. Orders be also sent to www.confonet.nic.in. File be consigned to record room.

 

Announced in open Forum on 07/12/2018.

 

                                                      (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                   PRESIDENT

(NIPUR CHANDNA)                                            (H M VYAS)

                   MEMBER                                                         MEMBER