DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 208 of 12.6.2018

                                      Decided on:           4.2.2021

Paramjit Kaur (DOB: 10.8.1974) wife of Sukhdev Singh, resident of H.No.144, North Avenue, Bhadson Road, Patiala (Aadhar No.3572 3363 0548,Mobile No.97786-60354) Pin 147001.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1. Nexa Atelier Automobiles Pvt. Ltd., Modi College to NIS Chowk, Lower Mall, Patiala through its Managing Director-147001.
2. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, Regd.Office, Plot No.1,Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110071 through its Managing Director.
3. Maruti Suzuki India Limited,GSTIN 06AAACM0829Q1Z8,Palam Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon (Haryana) 122 015 through its Managing Director.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                      Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

                                      Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President

                                      Sh.Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member    

                                      Sh.Y.S.Matta, Member

ARGUED BY

                                      Sh.Anand Puri, counsel for complainant.

                                      Sh.Jasbir Singh, counsel for OPs No.2&3.

                                      Opposite party No.1 ex-parte.         

 ORDER

                                      JASJIT SINGH BHINDER,PRESIDENT

1. This is the complaint filed by Paramjit Kaur (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against Nexa Atelier Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. and others (hereinafter referred to as the OP/s) .
2. Briefly the case of the complainant is that she purchased Maruti Ciaz Smart Hybrid Alafa Diesel car on 14.8.2017 from OP No.1 for a sum of Rs.10,72,600/- after availing loan from HDFC Bank and was registered vide No.PB-11-CE-2222.It is averred that the complainant availed the extended warranty upto 13.8.2021  for which Rs.17025.04P  has been charged by OP No.1.It is averred that since the purchase of the said car, the same is not working properly as while driving  the body of the car and accessory including its seats started vibrating and the car started bumbling while driving on the main road. It is averred that the complainant alongwith his son Lovepreet Sharma and husband approached the OP No.1 and brought the said defects in the knowledge of OP No.1 who asked the complainant to bring the car to its service center. Accordingly the complainant took the car to service centre on 21.3.2018 and was returned to her on 26.3.2018 stating that the defects have been removed but when the complainant drove the car the defects were persisting in the car. The complainant brought this fact to the knowledge of OP No.1 who asked the complainant to take the car at other service centre at Rajpura Road, Patiala. The complainant took the car there on 26.3.2008 and on 29.3.2018 it was informed to her take back the car as the defects have been removed but when the car was driven the defects were still existing in the car .It was informed to her on 29.3.2018 to take back the car . On 1.4.2018, the complainant against brought this fact to the knowledge of the OP who told that they have tried their level best to remove the defects. There is thus manufacturing defects in the car. The complainant got sent legal notice to the OPs on 21.4.2018 for replacement of the said car with new one of the same price having zero defect or to return the sale price of the same alongwith interest but of no avail as the OPs did not give any heed to her request which is illegal and caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant. There is also deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.
3. On this back ground of the facts, the complainant has filed this complaint with the prayer to accept the same by giving directions to the OPs to replace the said car with new one of the same price or to return the sale price of Rs.10,72,600/- plus Rs.17025/- of extended warranty alongwith interest @12% per annum; to pay Rs.2lac as damages and causing mental agony and harassment to the complainant and also to pay Rs.22000/-as litigation expenses.
4. Upon notice OPs No.2&3 appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written statement while OP No.1 did not come present and was accordingly proceeded against ex-parte.
5. In the written reply filed by OPs No.2&3 preliminary objections have been raised that the present complaint  is bad for non-joinder of necessary and proper parties; that the complaint is filed with an ulterior motive. It is submitted that the vehicle in question was sent to the workshop of Hira Automobiles Ltd. Patiala on 21.3.2018.The vehicle was to be inspected for the alleged problem of vibration but the complainant did not allow the inspection. The vehicle was sent to the workshop of OP No.1 on 26.3.2018 and noise from front was reported. The vehicle was inspected and no abnormality was found  and was returned to the complainant vide satisfaction note dated 29.3.2018. The OP is only responsible for providing warranty service during the warranty period of two years or 40,000/- kms. from the date of sale subject to certain terms and conditions.
6. On merits, it is submitted that the vehicle was delivered in perfect OK and roadworthy condition to the satisfaction of the complainant. It is further submitted that the vehicle in question had a manufacturer’s warranty for 24 months or 40,000 kms.,whichever is earlier. It  is further submitted that the complainant availed an extended warranty which starts after the expiry of manufacturer’s warranty and is valid upto another 40,000 kms. or two years, whichever is earlier. Further the OPs reiterated the facts as raised in the preliminary objections and after denying all other averments prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
7. In support of the complaint, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit,Ex.CA of the complainant alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C9 and closed the evidence.
8. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for OPs No.2&3 has tendered in evidence Ex.OPA of Kamaljeet Malhotra,Territory Sales Manager alongwith documents Exs.OP1 to OP2 and closed the evidence.
9. We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
10. The ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant purchased Maruti Ciaz Smart Hybrid Alfa Diesel car on 14.8.2017 from OP No.1 for Rs.10,72,600/- and was duly got registered  with the registering authority vide No.PB-11-CE-2222.The warranty in respect of the said car was given to the complainant and the complainant also availed extended warranty valid upto 13.8.2021 and OP has taken Rs.17025/- for extended warranty. The ld. counsel further argued that since the date of purchase of the said car, the same is not working properly. Complainant approached OP No.1 many times but the defect was not removed. The ld. counsel further argued that legal notice was also sent and prayer has been made that they be directed to replace the car or return the amount.
11. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for OPs No.2&3 has argued that vehicle in question sent to the workshop of Hira Automobiles and all the defects were removed. The ld. counsel further argued that the complainant herself has signed the satisfaction note so the complaint be dismissed.
12. To prove this complaint. Paramjit Kaur has tendered her affidavit,Ex.CA and she has deposed as per his complaint. Original receipt for purchase of the car from OP No.1 is Ex.C1.This is for Rs.10,72,600/-only. The certificate of registration is Ex.C2, certificate of extended warranty till 13.8.2021  or upto 80,000 kms. is Ex.C3, job car,Ex.C4, another job card,Ex.C5 and legal notice is Ex.C6.Exs.C7 to C9 are postal receipts.
13. On the other hand, Sh.Kamaljeet Malhotra has tendered his affidavit,Ex.OPA on behalf of OPs No.2&3. Ex.OP1 is the warranty policy,Ex.OP2 is the satisfaction note.
14. Admittedly the car in question was purchased by the complainant from OP No.1 for Rs.10,72,600/- vide receipt, Ex.C1 and OP No.1 did not bother to appear before this Commission and he was proceeded against exparte.Ex.C3 is the extended warranty and warranty is till 13.8.20221 or up till 80,000 kms.This warranty card was issued by the OP No.1 by taking amount of Rs.17025.04.So it is clear that till today the car is under warranty.Ex.C4 is the job card in which problem injector calibrate was recommended but the problem persists in the vehicle. So it is clear that there was problem in the vehicle and problem was persisting.Ex.C5 is another job card car checked and found OK.Ex.C6 is the legal notice sent to all the OPs vide registered cover but none of the OPs bothered to reply this legal notice. So it is clear that they deliberately not reply to all the allegations made in the legal notice.
15. On behalf of OPs, Ex.OP1 is the warranty policy, Ex.OP2 is the job card in which all fuel injectors calibrated. So it is clear that complainant has spent more than Rs.10lac in purchasing the car and as per his allegations  while driving the car, the body and accessory including its seats started vibrating and the said car started bumbling while driving on the main road. Before filing this complaint she got sent legal notice to the OPs and as per the job card,Ex.C4 there was defect in the car. The complainant has sought relief to replace the car with new one of the same model having zero defect or to return the price and admittedly the car is still under warranty for five years.The car cannot be replaced as there was no major defect and the defect which is persisting can be removed by the OPs.
16. So due to our discussion, the complaint stands partly allowed and the OPs are directed to remove all the defects in the car in question to the satisfaction of the complainant free of cost. The complainant is also entitled to compensation of Rs.15000/- and Rs.15000/-as litigation expenses. Compliance of the order be made by the  OPs within a period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of this order.

ANNOUNCED

DATED:4.2.2021         

                   Y.S.Matta         Vinod Kumar Gulati       Jasjit Singh Bhinder

                    Member                 Member                                  President