Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/194/2011

Burugupalli Thimma Raju - Complainant(s)

Versus

Orange Auto Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

V. Lakshmi Prasad

30 Jun 2015

ORDER

                                              Date of Registration of the Complaint:01-06-2011 

                                                                                                Date of Order:30-06-2015

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II AT

                                VISAKHAPATNAM

 

P  r  e  s  e  n  t:

1.  Sri H. Ananda Rao, M.A., L.L.B.,

     President           

2. Smt K. Saroja, M.A. B.L.,

     Lady Member 

                                3. Sri C.V. Rao, M.A., B.L.,

                                     Male Member

 

                          Tuesday, the 30^th day of June, 2015.

                             CONSUMER CASE No.194/2011

Between:-

Burugupalli Thimma Raju, S/o Sri Ramulu,

Hindu, aged 62 years, residing at D. No. 7-22-4/1,

Flat No.301, M.V.V. Beach Star, Kirlampudi

Layout, Chinnawaltair,  Visakhapatnam.

                                                                                                     ….. Complainant

And:-

1.Orange Auto Private Limited,

   Peda Waltair Junction, G.K. Mansion,

   4-46-12, Ground Floor, Visakhapatnam-530017.

2.General Motors India Private Limited, Plot No. 15,

   Echelon Institutional Area, Sector 32,

   Gurgaon-122001, Haryana, India.

   Tel:0124-3080000.

                                                                                   …  Opposite Parties

                     

This case coming on 09.06.2015 for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri V. Lakshmi Prasad, Advocate for the Complainant and Sri D.V.S.S. Somayajulu,, Advocate for the 1^st Opposite Party and Sri B.V. Ramanjaneya Rao, Advocate for the 2^nd Opposite Party and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following:

 

                                                ORDER

        (As per Smt. K. Saroja Honourable Lady Member on behalf of the Bench)

 

1.       The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant had purchased Chevrolet Captiva LT, Car with Engine No. Z 20S12554SSK, VIN: KLICF26RN83400538, Poly Silver Color, from the 1^st Opposite Party on 25.01.2010 and it was delivered to the Complainant on 27.01.2010.   The cost of the vehicle was Rs.17,52,285/- for life  tax, Rs.5,000/- handling charges, Rs.2,500/- Registration charges Rs.4,412/- for sundry debtors, Rs.5,175/- i.e., the cost of the vehicle was Rs.17,52,285/- and the total amount towards accessories and other registration charges.  The Complainant spent an amount of Rs.23,01,987/-.    The vehicle developed defects even from the beginning of its purchase, then the Complainant approached the 1^st Opposite Party on different dates for rectification various defects.   From 23.04.2010 to 23.04.2011for about 21 times the Complainant approached 1^st Opposite Party with some defects but they are not rectified.   The major complaint is that ABS warning lamp has been continuously flashing, the 1^st Opposite Party gave two years warranty to the said vehicle, the Complainant approached the 1^st Opposite Party within a period of 12 months for 21 times he has taken a vehicle to the service centre of the Opposite Party for its repairs but due to manufacturing defects in the said vehicle.   But the Opposite Party did not remove the defects till now, the vehicle ran only 17,000 kilometers.  The Opposite Parties technicians failed to remove the defects in the said vehicle and presently the vehicle is kept in the shed.   Inspite of many requests made by the Complainant the Opposite Parties did not rectify the defects.   Hence, this Complaint.

2.       a) To replace the defective vehicle with the new tested vehicle of same model or to refund its price of Rs.17,52,285/-;

          b) To pay damages of Rs.1,50,000/- to the Complainant keeping in view of the age, purpose for which it is purchased, status and for mental agony suffered by the Complainant;

          c) Costs of the Petition.

 

3.       The Opposite Parties strongly resisted the claim of the Complainant by contending, as can be seen from their individual counters.     The 1^st Opposite Party stated in their counter that vehicle was continuously used for  for his travel to the places situated at interiors of village where the roads are usually rugged, muddy and not measurable to proper standards, besides travel to various urban locations.    The Complainant continuously used the vehicle for a period of 15 months and has travelled about 28,060 kilometers as on 2^nd June, 2011.   As such the 1^st Opposite Party stated that the vehicle has no manufacturing defects and the repairs were carried out by the technicians of the Opposite Parties, whenever, the Complainant approached the 1^st Opposite Party

 

4.       The 2^nd Opposite Party strongly denied the allegations made by the Complainant by contending, as can be seen from its counter that the major allegations of the Complainant in respect of blinking of ABS lights,  ABS is not the braking system of the vehicle.  ABS helps prevent a vehicle from skidding which can take place when brakes are applied in certain circumstances.  For such purposes, sensors are attached and present in the vehicle.   At the times, due to noticeable changes in the parameters of the vehicle which can come about on various counts such as laden weight of the vehicle, tyre pressure etc., the sensors and the related technology may require re-setting or adjustment.  The blinking of the ABS lights therefore does not mean that there is any defect in the ABS system.   Given the extra sensitive nature of the technology on which ABS works, the sensors and the related technology in particular may require re-setting which is indicated by the blinking of the ABS lights.   At times, due to extra dirt etc., the sensors get clogged; which sets off the blinking of the ABS lights.   At paragraph 7 of the Complaint; the Complainant himself has stated that the vehicle is being utilized to travel to “so many villages”.   In the process of such travelling to “so many villages”; the wheels of the vehicle are coming into contract with and picking up extra dirt/mud which is clogging and interfering with the sensors of the ABS triggering off the blinking of ABS lights.   This extra dirt/mud on account of travelling to “so many villages” is required by the Complainant to be got cleaned, particularly from the wheels, in a most careful and vigilant manner; otherwise such extra dirt/mud accumulating particularly on the wheels shall interfere with the sensors related to ABS technology and trigger off the blinking of ABS lights.

 

The 2^nd Opposite Party stated that blinking of the ABS lights is in the nature of a precaution and not a defect.  Blinking means that the sensors and the related technology may require an adjustment/cleaning on account of either noticeable changes in the parameters of the vehicle brought on by factors such as laden weight of the vehicle, tyre pressure etc. or by accumulation of extra dirt or similar such material on the sensors.   If the complaint takes care in following all the instructions in the owners manual with such extra care and effort as required on account of the vehicle travelling to large number of villages, particularly in its lower/underneath portions including the wheels; it is stated that the blinking of the ABS lights would not be a hindrance, if any.

 

          The blinking of ABS lights has been reported by the Complainant on three occasions in a span covering 18 months.   Given the fact that the vehicle is travelling to a large number of villages on a regular basis as stated by the complaint himself; it is normal and expected that the extra dirt/mud accumulating on the wheel frame and clogging the censors thereby would interfere with the working of the censors and, in this connection, the blinking of ABS lights on three occasions in a span of over 18 months is absolutely misconceived to be alleged as reflective of manufacturing defect.   Even such blinking can be avoided if extra effort is put in to keep the wheels free of the extra dirt/mud accumulating there on account of the constant travel of the vehicle to interior villages.

 

          It is reiterated that blinking of the ABS light does not mean a defect in the ABS system.  ABS, as is stated, is not in itself a braking system; but a supplemental safety system helping to prevent skids when brakes are applied in certain circumstances.   The very fact that the Complainant has been unable to give a single instance with required details of any instance of the skidding of the vehicle establishes that there is no defect in the ABS system.   So, the Opposite Parties have no liability to pay any reliefs asked by the Complainant.

 

5.       At the time of enquiry, both parties filed their affidavits as well as written arguments to support their contentions.  The 1^st Opposite Party filed additional written arguments and also citations.   Exs.A1 to A22 are marked for the Complainant.   Exs.B1 to B11 are marked for the Opposite Parties  Heard Both sides.

 

6.       Ex.A1 is the photo copy Vehicle History Card issued by the 1^st Opposite Party 27.01.2010.  Ex.A2 is the photo copy of Pamphlet of Trust Activities issued by the Sri Burugupalli Sreeramulu Lakshminarayana Memorial Trust.  Ex.A3 is the photo copy of Information relating to the ABS Warning Lamp.  Ex.A4 is the photo copy vehicle history card issued by the 1^st Opposite Party dated 27.01.2010.   Ex.A5 is the photo copy of Retail Invoice issued by the 1^st Opposite Party in favour of the Complainant dated 20.08.2010.  Ex.A6 is the photo copy of Retail Invoice issued by the 1^st Opposite Party in favour of the Complainant dated 26.06.2010.   Ex.A7 is the photo copy of Repair order along with Cash Bill issued by the 1^st Opposite Party in favour of the Complainant dated 04.12.2010.   Ex.A8 is the photo copy of Proforma Invoice issued by the 1^st Opposite Party in favour of the Complainant dated 22.12.2010.   Ex.A9 is the photo copy of Repair Order issued by the 1^st Opposite Party to the Complainant dated 24.12.2010.   Ex.A10 is the photo copy of Receipt an amount of Rs.790/- issued by the 1^st Opposite Party in favour of the Complainant 27.12.2010.  Ex.A11 is the photo copy of Job Card Check Slip issued by the 1^st Opposite Party dated 31.12.2010.   Ex.A12 is the photo copy of Retail Invoice issued by the 1^st Opposite Party in favour of the Complainant dated 24.01.2010.   Ex.A13 is the photo copy of Job Card Check Slip issued by the 1^st Opposite Party dated 25.01.2011.   Ex.A14 is the photo copy of Repair order issued by the 1^st Opposite Party dated 05.02.2011.  Ex.A15 is the photo copy of Repair order issued by the 1^st Opposite Party in favour of the Complainant dated 19.02.2011.   Ex.A16 is the photo copy of Repair order issued by the 1^st Opposite Party on 14.03.2011.  Ex.A17 is the photo copy of Job Card Check Slip issued by the 1^st Opposite Party dated 09.03.2011.  Ex.A18 is the photo copy of Retail Invoice issued by the 1^st Opposite Party in fvour of the Complainant dated 15.03.2011.  Ex.A19 is the photo copy of Repair order issued by the 1^st Opposite Party dated 23.03.2011.   Ex.A20 is the photo copy of Retail Invoice issued by the 1^st Opposite Party in favour of the Complainant dated 31.03.2011.   Ex.A21 is the photo copy of Repair Order issued by the 1^st Opposite Party dated 18.04.2011.  Ex.A22 is the photo copy of Retail Invoice issued by the 1^st Opposite Party in favour of the Complainant dated 23.04.2011.

 

7.       Ex.B1 is the original Job Card Check Slip No. 0047356 (Kms. 41,988) duly signed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (3) dated 01.12.2012.  Ex.B2 is the original Job Card No. 003312 (34795 Kms.) duly signed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (3) dated 02.09.2011.  Ex.B3 is the original Job Card Check Slip No.001788 (30800 kms) duly signed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (3) dated 30.06.2011.  Ex.AB4 is the original Job Card Check Slip No. 001381 (28562 kms) duly signed by customer with related check slip and retail Invoice (4) dated 09.06.2011.   Ex.B5 is the original Job Card Check Slip No.1233(28050 kms) duly signed by customer with related Check Slip and Retail Invoice (3) dated 02.06.2011.   Ex.B6 is the original Job Card Check Slip No. 000994 (27967 kms) duly signed by customer with related Check Slip and Retail Invoice (3) dated 24.05.2011.   Ex.B7 is the original Job Card No. 000312 (22534) duly signed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (3) dated 18.04.2011.   Ex.B8 is the original Job Card Check Slip No.006248 (20145 kms) duly signed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (4) dated 25.03.2011.  Ex.B9 is the original Job Card No.005376 (19455 kms) duly signed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (3) dated 05.02.2011.  Ex.B10 is the original copy of Repair order in two sheets duly signed by the Complainant issued by the 1^st Opposite Party dated 02.07.2011.  Ex.B11 is the original copy of Checklist for Monsoon Check up Camp signed by the Complainant dated 02.07.2012.

 

8.       The fact shown from Exs.B1 to Ex.9 is that the Complainant approached the Opposite Parties and handed over his vehicle for rectification of defects in the said vehicle and taken back his vehicle for number of times.   The fact shown from Exs.B10 and B11 that the vehicle was ran about 48,566 kilometers on 2.7.2012.

 

9.       The point that would arise for determination in the case is:-

Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.   Whether the Complainant is entitled to any reliefs asked for?

 

10        After careful perusal of the case record, this Forum finds that the Complainant approached the service centre of the 1^st Opposite Party number of times and rectified by the Opposite Parties technicians after payment made by the Complainant.   The vehicle was purchased in the year, 2010 and it was ran about 48,566 kilometers according to Ex.B10.   It shows that the vehicle was functioning normal with some minor problems.  The Complainant also signed on the Job Card  and received his vehicle.   The Complainant failed to file any technical opinion regarding the manufacturing defects in the said vehicle.    The document clearly reveals that the vehicle is running in good condition.   If there is any manufacturing defect in the vehicle, it cannot be run about 48,566 kilometers as on 2.7.2012.   Moreover, the Complainant stated in their pleadings that he was not using the said vehicle as there is manufacturing defect and it was kept in the shed and by engaging taxes for his daily works.   But the documents Exs.B10 and B11 shows that the Complainants vehicle did not kept in any shed and it was taken to the service centre for minor repairs and the Opposite Parties for regular services.   The Opposite Parties relied upon citations 1) 2005 STPL (CL) 5 NC held in Hema Vasantial Dokaria vs. Bajaj Auto Limited and others “if a part could be replaced or defect could be removed, replacement cannot be ordered.” 2) The Honarable Supreme Court in the case of “Maruthi Udyog Ltd., Susheel Kumar Gabgotra & another (2006) 4 SCC 644) has held that where defects in various parts of a car are established, direction for replacement of the car would not be justified.” 3) A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Hyderabad held in F.A. 384/2009 against C.C. 234/2006, the Manager, Vs. Kolla Nagababu and others.    The Complainant failed to file any expert opinion that his vehicle is having manufacturing defects without expert opinion, we cannot assume that the vehicle is having manufacturing defect.    We are of the opinion, that the vehicle ran about 48,566 kilometers as on, 2012 from 2010 to 2012 according to Ex.B10.   Moreover, the Complainant his failed to show any documents that his vehicle is in the shed.   The Complainant used is vehicle continuously for about 2 years as per the documents produced by both parties.  It shows that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.   Hence, the Complainant is liable to be dismissed. 

 

11.     In the result, this Complaint is dismissed.   No costs.

 

Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum, this 30^th day of June3, 2015.     

             

Sd/-                                          Sd/-                                          Sd/-       

President                              Male Member                      Lady Member

                                     

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For the Complainant:-

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.A01	27.01.2010	Vehicle History Card issued by the 1st OP	Photo copy
Ex.A02		Pamphlet of Trust Activities issued by the Sri Burugupalli  Sreeramulu Lakshminarayana Memorial Trust	Photo copy
Ex.A03		Information relating to the ABS Warning Lamp	Photo copy
Ex.A04	27.01.2010	Vehicle history card issued by the 1st OP	Photo copy
Ex.A05	20.08.2010	Retail Invoice issued by the 1st OP in favour of the Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A06	26.06.2010	Retail Invoice issued by the 1st OP in favour of the Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A07	04.12.2010	Repair order along with Cash Bill issued by the 1st OP in favour of the Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A08	22.12.2010	Proforma Invoice issued by the 1st OP in favour of the Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A09	24.12.2010	Repair Order issued by the 1st OP to the Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A10	27.12.2010	Receipt an amount of Rs.790/- issued by the 1st OP in favour of the Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A11	31.12.2010	Job Card Check Slip issued by the1st OP	Photo copy
Ex.A12	24.01.2010	Retail Invoice issued by the 1st OP in favour of the Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A13	25.01.2011	Job Card Check Slip issued by the 1st OP	Photo copy
Ex.A14	05.02.2011	Repair Order issued by the 1st OP	Photo copy
Ex.A15	19.02.2011	Repair Order issued by the 1st OP in favour of Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A16	14.03.2011	Repair order issued by the 1st OP	Photo copy
Ex.A17	09.03.2011	Job Card Check Slip issued by the 1st OP	Photo copy
Ex.A18	15.03.2011	Retail Invoice issued by the 1st OP in favour of the Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A19	23.03.2011	Repair order issued by the 1st OP	Photo copy
Ex.A20	31.03.2011	Retail Invoice issued by the 1st OP in favour of the Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A21	18.04.2011	Repair Order issued by the 1st OP	Photo copy
Ex.A22	23.04.2011	Retail Invoice issued by the 1st OP in favour of the Complainant	Photo copy

 

For the Opposite Parties:-    

                                       

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.B01	01.12.2012	Job Card Check Slip No. 0047356 (Kms. 41,988) duly signed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (3)	Original
Ex.B02	02.09.2011	Job Card No. 003312 (34795 Kms.) duly signed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (3)	Original
Ex.B03	30.06.2011	Job Card Check Slip No. 001788 (30800 Kms.) duly singed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (3)	Original
Ex.B04	09.06.2011	Job Card Check Slip No. 001381 (28562 Kms.) duly singed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (4)	Original
Ex.B05	02.06.2011	Job Card Check Slip No. 1233 (28050 Kms.) duly singed by customer with related Check Slip and Retail Invoiice (3)	Original
Ex.B06	24.05.2011	Job Card Check Slip No. 000994 (27967 Kms.) duly signed by customer with related Check Slip and Retail Invoice (3)	Original
Ex.B07	18.04.2011	Job Card No. 000312 (22534 Kms.) duly singed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (3)	Original
Ex.B08	25.03.2011	Job Card Check Slip No. 006248 (20145 Kms.) duly signed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (4)	Original
Ex.B09	05.02.2011	Job Card No. 005376 (19455 Kms.) duly signed by customer with related check slip and retail invoice (3)	Original
Ex.B10	02.07.2011	Repair Order in two sheets duly signed by the Complainant issued by the 1st OP	Original
Ex.B11	02.07.2011	Checklist for Monsoon Check up Camp up Camp signed by the Complainant	Original

 

Sd/-                                Sd/-                                 Sd/-

President                              Male Member                       Lady Member