Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/277/2019

N. Hemavathi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Olympia Honda, Corporate Office - Opp.Party(s)

R. Malaichamy

16 Jun 2022

ORDER

Date of Complaint Filed : 24.10.2019

Date of Reservation      : 19.05.2022

Date of Order               : 16.06.2022

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                                 : PRESIDENT

                        THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,                :  MEMBER  I 

                       THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,         : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.277/2019

THURSDAY, THE 16^th DAY OF JUNE 2022

N. Hemavathi,

D/o. Nagarajan,

No.399 A, Pillaiyar Kovil Street,

Vallalar Nagar,

Madambakkam Post,

Madambakkam – 603 202.                                               ... Complainant                

 

..Vs... 

1.Olympia Honda,

   Corporate Office,

   By its Authorized Officer,

   No.617, Bharat Kumar Bhavan,

   Anna Salai,

   Chennai – 600 006.

 

2.Olympia Honda,

   (Prop. Khivraj Vahan Pvt. Ltd.,)

   By its Authorized Officer,

   Plot No.21, Ambit IT Park Road,

   Industrial Estate,

   Ambattur,

   Chennai – 600 058.                                                   ...  Opposite Parties

 

******

Counsel for the Complainant             : M/s. R.Malaichamy

Counsel for the Opposite Parties        : Exparte

 

        On perusal of records and after having heard the oral arguments of the Counsel for the Complainant,  we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by the Member – I,Thiru. T. R. Sivakumhar.,B.A., B.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to replace the Car with a new one (HONDA AMAZE) or to pay a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and torture caused to the Complainant and also for the deficiency in service and direct the Opposite Parties to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

The Case of the Complainant is that she had purchased a New Honda Amaze (Diesel) car from the 2^nd Opposite Party on 13.04.2018 by paying down payment of Rs.1,50,000/- and balance by hypothecation from Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Ltd on monthly EMI of Rs.18,000/- and after buying the said car she had entered into an agreement with on P.Nandaiah with a condition that he has to pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- per day. She approached the 2^nd Opposite party through the said Nandaiah for service of her car after running 28,000 kms and during the service it was found that there was a leakage of oil from engine and hence the leakage was temporarily arrested by the 2^nd Opposite Party. Once again she found oil leakage from engine and the same was arrested for time being by the 2^nd Opposite Party but even after replacing of engine cascade, the problem of  oil leakage was not solved. Subsequently the 2^nd Opposite Party replaced the engine oil seal when approached. As the problem of oil leakage was severe she approached the 2^nd Opposite Party, who had instructed her to hand over the said car for proper service to rectify the said issue and hence she handed over her car. The 2^nd Opposite Party took one month’s time to rectify the issue of which she had suffered financial constrain to pay the EMI, which caused her to suffer both mentally and physically. In spite of the car was with service for a month’s time with the 2^nd Opposite Party the issue of oil leakage was arrested for time being without rectifying the problem in Engine. After 10 days of the said service she found the same issue and reported the same to the 2^nd opposite Party but there was no response which curtailed to use the car only for limited purpose. As there was no response from the 2^nd Opposite Party she approached another service station under Capital Honda, who informed that the entire engine was in a bad condition and recommended to clear various leakages in the engine. Due to non rectification of the defects in her car she was unable to earn the monthly rent though leased out her car and she was cornered to pay the EMI from her own funds. As the 2^nd Opposite Party had sold the car with a manufacturing defect, the Opposite parties were not only liable to replace the car with a new one but also to compensate her not less than Rs.6,00,000/- for her mental and physical sufferings. In spite of being approached the Opposite repeatedly they have not solved the issue properly and found to sold a car with manufacturing defect and the willful negligence of the Opposite Parties had made her to suffer continuously in the hands of the Opposite Parties, amounts to deficiency of service. Hence the complaint.

3.     The Complainant had filed her Proof Affidavit and written arguments and on the side of the Complainant documents Ex.A1 to A-19 were marked.

4.    The Opposite Parties did not appear before this Commission even after sufficient notice to them. Hence the Opposite Parties were set exparte.

5.   Points for Consideration :-

1. Whether the Complainant is a Consumer and the Complaint is maintainable?

2.     Whether the Complainant is entitled for the relief claimed in the complaint and entitled for any other relief/s?

6.     Point No.1 :-

The Complainant had purchased the subject car for running the same as a Tourist Motor Car/Taxi as found in Ex.A3, the Registration Certificate of the Subject Car wherein the class type of the car is clearly mentioned as Tourist Motor car/Taxi and by Ex.A5 which were the, Permit in respect of a particular contract Carriage issued by Transport Department granting permit to run the vehicle throughout Tamilnadu from 13.04.2018 to 12.04.2023 as well as Tax Card issued by the Transport Department, wherein the usage of the car is clear that the subject car is a particular contract carriage, though the subject car was purchased for commercial purpose, it is contended that only for her livelihood by self employment but Ex.A6 & Ex.A7 are the Agreement Leasing out the subject car on 27.06.2018 and 16.07.2019, respectively entered into between the Complainant with one P.Nandaiah, would clearly establish that the subject car is used for commercial purpose on profit basis. Hence this Commission holds that the Complainant is not a Consumer as defined under Section 2(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and she cannot maintain this complaint. This commission is of the considered view that the complaint filed by the Complainant is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.

7.      Point No.2:-

As discussed and decided in point No.1 against the Complainant, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief as claimed in the complaint and / or  for any other relief/s.                             

In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No Cost.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on  16^th of June 2022.  

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1	30.03.2018	Tax Invoice
Ex.A2	31.03.2018	General Insurance for Vehicle
Ex.A3	13.04.2018	Registration Certificate by RTO
Ex.A4	13.04.2018	Letter of 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A5	16.04.2018	Permit issued by Transport Department
Ex.A6	27.06.2018	Agreement Deed
Ex.A7	16.07.2019	Agreement Deed
Ex.A8	31.03.2019	Certificate of Insurance
Ex.A9	22.04.2018	Free Service by 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A10	16.06.2018	Free Service by 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A11	15.10.2018	Paid Service by 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A12	10.11.2018	Paid Service by 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A13	06.12.2018	Paid Service by 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A14	10.12.2018	Paid Service by 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A15	29.12.2018	Re-estimate chart given by the 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A16	18.01.2019	Tax Invoice by the 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A17	23.01.2019	Tax Invoice by the 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A18	06.04.2019	Paid Service at other service station
Ex.A19	08.08.2019	Representation by the Complainant a/w postal receipts & acknowledgment

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Parties:-

 

NIL

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                   B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT