Complainant Aman Jyoti has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (for short, C.P.Act.) seeking necessary directions to the opposite parties to change the vehicle or the amount of the vehicle i.e. Rs.11,14,683/- alongwith 18% interest P.A. be refunded Opposite parties be further directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental harassment alongwith Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.

2.        The case of the complainant in brief is that he purchased a  Maruti Vitara Breeza ZDI+VBRDCZ2 having Chassis No.MA3NYFB1SKA505747 and Engine No.D13A-5784910 on 04.03.2019 vide Invoice No.014/VSL/18001861 bearing Provisional Registration Mark PB-35-AE-4554 from opposite party no.1 for Rs.11,14,683/-. The abovesaid vehicle was financed from State Bank of India Branch Saili Road, Pathankot. He has further pleaded that the abovesaid vehicle is defective all around i.e. the Centre locking LATCH Assy of  Front door was not in working order, fog lamps of both sides are in disorder. On 06.03.2019 he complained about the defective parts of the vehicle to the C.E.O. Ltd. Col. Y.P.S. Manhas, but he refused to change the above defective parts of the said vehicle. The abovesaid vehicle is not in proper working order but the C.E.O. fixed the slip P.D. O.K. This means this vehicle is ready for running on road. He requested Lt.Col. Manhas to change the defective parts of the said vehicle but he refused to change these parts of vehicle and asked him that "we are not permitted to change defective part of the new vehicle". Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  On 08.03.2019, he again requested Y.P.Manhas and also approached through his brother Lt.Col. to Y.P. Manhas to change the defective parts of vehicle. Then he agreed to change one part of the vehicle i.e. one part of the Latch Assy Front door and other part not changed and also the front fog lamp. He harassed him  for six days and the vehicle remained in Agency. He is a businessman. He has suffered a lot of loss in business due to mental harassment. The opposite party issued a vehicle without alignment and wheel balancing. The opposite parties did not provide service to him which is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.

 3.         Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite party no.1 appeared through their counsel and filed their written reply taking the preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable in the present form and is without any merits and without any cause of action against the opposite party; the complainant has failed to set out any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties; the present complaint is without any cause of action and the complainant has filed the present complaint on false assertions and has concealed the material facts from the Hon'ble Commission. On merits, it was submitted that on 08.03.2019 the complainant came to the workshop of opposite party no.1 with the complaint that there was some problem in the center locking and the complainant was properly attended and he was informed that the spare part was not readily available and it was to be outsourced from other workshop. No official/employee of the opposite party ever refused to provide any service to the complainant.  All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

4.       As per report of Ahlmed notice issued to opposite party no.2 has not been received back. Period of 30 days had already elapsed. Presumption could be drawn that opposite parties had been served but was intentionally evading the service of the notice. Case called several times, but none had appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2. Hence, opposite party was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order 04.06.2019. 

5.       Alongwith the complaint, complainant has filed his own affidavit Ex.C-1 alongwith photocopies of documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-8.

6.      Alongwith the written reply opposite party no.1 has filed affidavit of Sh.Sumeet Kumar Service Advisor Ex.OP-1 alongwith document Ex.OP-1/1 (3 pages).

7.        Rejoinder filed by the complainant.

8.        Written arguments filed on behalf of complainant.

9.        We have carefully gone through the pleadings of counsel for the complainant; oral arguments advanced by their respective counsels and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsel for the complainant for the purposes of adjudication of the present complaint.

10.     Complainant purchased one Maruti Vitara Breeza ZDI+VBRDCZ2 having Chassis No.MA3NYFB1SKA505747 and Engine No.D13A-5784910 on 04.03.2019 against Invoice No.014/VSL/18001861 bearing  Registration No.PB-35-AE-4554 from opposite party no.1 for Rs.11,14,683/-. On 6.3.2019 the complainant found some defects in the vehicle like door latch and fog lamps defective and complained about the same to CEO of opposite party No.1. On 8.3.2019 apart of the latch assembly was attended to by opposite party no.1 while other issues remained unattended.

11.         From the above pleadings of the complainant and opposite party it is apparent that complainant had a genuine grievance ever since the purchase of vehicle and his grievance was not attended to promptly and fully by opposite party no.1. It was partly resolved as is clear from Job Card i.e. Ex.OP-1/1 (3pages) during the period 8.3.2019 to 10.3.2019. Remaining issues of Fog Lamp and Latch assembly etc. are pending and need to be attended to by opposite party.

12.     Hence the present complaint can be best disposed of by giving directions to both the parties. The complainant is directed to approach the opposite party for resolution of pending faults within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and opposite party is directed to change/replace the latch assembly and fog lamps of the said vehicle, free of costs with new one to the satisfaction of the complainant within  seven days of receipt of vehicle. The present complaint is disposed of accordingly. Further opposite party is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant.

13.         The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.

14.    Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned.                                                                                                  

                                                                         (Naveen Puri)

                                                                            President   

Announced:                                                   (Raghbir Singh Sukhija)

August 10, 2022                                                  Member

*MK*