Haryana

StateCommission

RP/24/2016

MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

PARKASH SINGH - Opp.Party(s)

VAIBHAV NARANG

15 Sep 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

                                                Revision Petition No.   24 of 2016

                                                Date of Institution:       26.02.2016

                                                Date of Decision:         15.09.2016

 

Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, Gateway Building, Apollo Bunder, Mumbai 400039 through its Authorized Signatory.

                             Petitioner-Opposite Party No.1

 

Versus

 

1.      Parkash Singh son of Zora Singh, Plot No.347, Industrial Area, Phase 1, Panchkula.

Respondent-Complainant

 

2.      Luxmi Switchgears Private Limited, Plot No.82, Industrial Area, Phase 1, Panchkula through its Manager.

                                      Respondent-Opposite Party No.2

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.

                                                         

Present:              Mr. Vaibhav Narang, Advocate for the petitioner

                             Mr. Surender Pal, Advocate for the respondent No.1-complainant

                             Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate for the respondent No.2

           

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J, (ORAL)

 

                    Parkash Singh-complainant (respondent herein) purchased vehicle No.HR-99-MLT-9692 of XUV 500 make on June 4^th, 2012 from Luxmi Switchgears Private Limited, Industrial Area, Phase 1, Panchkula, Authorized Dealer-opposite party No.2 of Mahindra & Mahindra Limited-petitioner.  He found some defects in the vehicle, that is, brake noise, LHS front wheel noise, vehicle pulling right hand side, front suspension noise etc.  He approached the Dealer but the defects could not be rectified inspite of their best efforts.  He filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 before the District Consumer Forum, Panchkula.

2.                District Forum vide order dated April 01^st, 2014 directed the petitioner and Authorized Dealer to replace the vehicle with new one or to pay the price of vehicle, that is, Rs.12,90,697/- to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum with effect from June 04^th, 2012 till its actual payment.  In addition, Rs.20,000/- was also awarded as compensation to the complainant.

3.                Against the said order of the District Forum, petitioner filed Appeal No.360 of 2014 before this Commission. The order dated April 01^st, 2014 was set aside vide order dated August 27^th, 2014 with the direction to the complainant to take the vehicle at the workshop of Luxmi Switchgears Private Limited, who would rectify all the defects as pointed out by the complainant, free of cost. It was also ordered that after repair of the vehicle, two engineers of petitioner would examine and issue a certificate to the complainant with regard to the removal of defects.  Besides this, Rs.50,000/- was also awarded to the complainant as compensation including the compensation of Rs.20,000/- awarded by the District Consumer Forum. 

4.                The certificate with regard to removal of defects was issued by two engineers, that is, Naveen Sharma and Vinay Kumar, Area Customer Care Manager of petitioner (page 39), which is reproduced as under:-

          “        Certificate with respect to removal of defects 

          Date : 11.10.2014

 

          Mr. Parkash Singh

          s/o Zora Singh

          Plot No.347,

          Industrial Area, Phase I,

          Panchkula

         

          This is to certify that Mahindra XUV 500 with registration No.HR03P0303 has been inspected by us in compliance of the order dated 27.08.2014 passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana in case No.360/14.  All the concerns raised by you in the complaint, that is, brake noise, LHS Front Wheel Noise, vehicle pulling right hand side, front suspension noise, wiper and horn not working, have been rectified fully.  No such defect now exists in the vehicle.

         

          Details of the actions taken to rectify the defects mentioned in your complaint are as follows:

 

S. No.	Defects Reported	Action taken	Final Observations
1.	Brake Noise	Brake pads kit and brake discs replaced.  Brake pads & brake discs are scheduled maintenance parts and need replacement when worn out	Brake noise checked at different speeds with sudden & gradual brakes application.  No noise from brakes observed.  Concern addressed.
2.	LHS front wheel noise	Front LHS shock absorber replaced	Road test taken & no abnormal noise found. Concern addressed.
3.	Vehicle pulling right side	Wheel alignment done	Vehicle tested as per SOP.  All the 4 tires have already covered their normal life as the vehicle has run 81000 kms & this is also a reason for pulling.  Vehicle checked with new set of tires & no pulling observed. Recommended for replacement of tires for better results.
4.	Front suspension noise	Stabilizer bar bushes, replaced in both front & rear.  LHS shock absorber replaced.  All suspension fasteners retightened as per specified torque.	Vehicle tested in different road conditions for suspension noise.  No noise from suspension found. Concern addressed.
5.	Wiper not working	Washer nozzle adjustment done	Wipers operation checked at different speeds.  Wipers operation found ok.  Concern addressed.
6.	Horn not working	Horn pad adjustment done	Horn working fine.  Concern addressed.

 

 

                   Sd/-                                                            Sd/-

          (Naveen Sharma)                                     (Vinay Kumar)

Area Customer Care Manager      Area Customer Care Manager     

   Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.                    Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.   

 

5.                By order dated August 27^th, 2014, it was also ordered that in case, complainant is not satisfied with the repair, he could approach competent Forum for the redressal of his grievances.  The complainant felt dissatisfied with the report of the engineers and he again filed complaint before the District Forum.

6.                The District Forum vide order dated January 19^th, 2016 on the basis of report of Service Engineer, Office of Senior Mechanical Engineer, Government Central Workshop, Haryana, Chandigarh  directed the petitioner to overhaul the suspension of the vehicle at their own cost.    

7.                Against the said order, present revision has been filed by Mahindra & Mahindra Limited-petitioner.

8.                The above referred inspection report has been perused, which reads as under:-

                   “During the inspection of vehicle, above said various faults were observed as this particular vehicle is three years and covered more than 1 lacs km.  At this stage, it is very difficult to give specific opinion whether the defects in the vehicle are manufacturing defects or not.  Though the suspension systems is of wear and tear nature but it may be manufacturing defect, as per the vehicle repair history, the problem continued since 2012 and company has replaced front left hand side and rear right hand side shock absorbers at around 81000 KM & 101000 KM.  The fault in suspension system is still observed, the specific opinion can only be given after overhauling the suspension system.”

9.                A reading of the aforesaid report and the report dated October 11^th, 2014 reproduced in paragraph No.4 of this order, there is no doubt in holding that the defect in the vehicle still persists.  The District forum has ordered to overhaul the suspension of the vehicle, which of course was required.  Thus, no case is made out to interfere in the impugned order. The revision petition is dismissed.

 

Announced 15.09.2016

(Urvashi Agnihotri) Member

(Nawab Singh) President

 

UK