BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

ERNAKULAM.

Date of filing : 07/02/2009

Date of Order : 14/09/2011

Present :-

Shri. A. Rajesh, President.

Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.

Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

C.C. No. 63/2009

Between

 

And

O R D E R

A. Rajesh, President.

1. Briefly, the facts of the complainant's case are as follows :-

The complainant's scooter bearing registration No. KL 07 AZ 4953 met with an accident on 09-11-2008, while he was riding the vehicle. On 10-11-2008, he entrusted the vehicle with the 1^st opposite party to carry out the repairs of the vehicle. In spite of repeated requests, the 1^st opposite party did not deliver the vehicle after its repairs. Thus, the complainant is before us seeking the following reliefs against the 1^st opposite party:

1. The 1^st opposite party may be directed to complete the repair work.

2. To pay compensation and costs.

2. Version of the 1^st opposite party :

The complainant entrusted his vehicle with the 1^st opposite party to repair the same. The 3^rd opposite party had stopped manufacturing of the scooter in 2007 and spare parts were not available. So, the 1^st opposite party could not carry out the repairs. The matter was conveyed to the complainant. At the request of the complainant, the 1^st opposite party made minor repairs by collecting Rs. 216.17 for spare parts and Rs. 300/- for labour charges. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the 1^st opposite party.

2. The 2^nd opposite party filed version raising the following contentions : -

The grievance of the complainant is against the 1^st opposite party. On intimation of the accident, the 2^nd opposite party appointed a licensed surveyor to assess the loss and damage and the surveyor has assessed the loss at Rs. 6,955.81. The insured has neither produced the bills nor replacement of the parts nor labour charges. If on production of the same, the 2^nd opposite party is ready to settle the claim on the basis of the survey report. If not the complainant is not entitled to get any relief against the 2^nd opposite party.

4. Contention of the third opposite party :

The 3^rd opposite party was not aware of the complaint till receipt of notice from this Forum. They were not aware of accident on 09-11-2008 and also regarding any accidental repair. The 3^rd opposite party is ready to provide any assistance required by the complainant. The complainant is not entitled to the claim as prayed for in the complaint.

5. This Forum vide order dated 19-02-2010 allowed this complaint. The 1^st opposite party who was absent during the proceedings preferred appeal against the order. The Hon'ble Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission vide order in Appeal No. 302/2010 dated 02-07-2010 remitted the complaint for fresh disposal.

6. The complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts. A1 to A7 were marked on his side. The 1^st opposite party was examined as DW1. Ext. B1 was marked on the side of the 2^nd opposite party. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced by the 3^rd opposite party. Heard the counsel for the parties.

7. The points that came up for consideration are :-

i) Whether the complainant is entitled to get the scooter

repaired by the 1^st opposite party?

ii) Compensation and costs of the proceedings. ?

8. Point No. i. :- During evidence at the instance of the 1^st opposite party, an expert commissioner was appointed by this Forum and he filed his report. Though not called upon or marked eventhough on file. The expert commissioner assessed the damages of the scooter which reads as follows :

Sl. No.	Particulars	Quantity	Cost of parts
	Lever steering handle	2	130.00
	Frame Comp. body	1	4139.62
	Cover Comp. Front	1	904.00
	Number plate front	1	45.00
	Handle comp. steering	1	520.77
	Cover handle front	1	151.48
	Lense front LH winker	1	37.80
	Cover handle upper	1	119.02
	Cover handle under	1	73.64
	Mirror assy	1	107.22
	Box inner	1	594.76
	Sticker front panel	1	107.22
	Total		6930.53

9.As per the report, an amount of Rs. 6,930.53 is required to carry out the repair of the vehicle. The insurance surveyor appointed by the 2^nd opposite party as well corroborates, the findings of the expert commissioner which is not been controverted or challenged. As per the report of the surveyor, a sum of Rs. 6,955.81 is required to complete the repair work. The definite case of the 1^st opposite party is that he could not complete the work due to non-availability of spare parts. The 3^rd opposite party categorically expressed their willingness to provide the required spare parts on payment basis.

10. For reasons above, matter can be resolved as under squarely :

1. The complainant shall produce the vehicle to the 1^st opposite party for its repairs.

2. The 1^st opposite party shall go by the assessment of the expert commissioner and carry out the repair work of the scooter within 30 days from the date of receipt of the spare parts from the 3^rd opposite party.

3. The 3^rd opposite party shall provide the spare parts as mentioned in the expert commissioner's report to the 1^st opposite party within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and collect its price from them.

4. The 2^nd opposite party shall pay to the 1^st opposite party the insurance amount as per the report of the expert commissioner from 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 14^th day of September 2011.

Sd/- A. Rajesh,President.

Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member.

Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

Forwarded/By Order,

Senior Superintendent

A P P E N D I X

Complainant's Exhibits :-

Opposite party's Exhibits :-

=========

Date of Despatch of this Order ::

By Post ::

By Hand ::