(Sri D. Shankar Rao, Member)
1. This is a complaint filed by the complainant under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking a direction to the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and travelling charges besides taking legal action against the opposite party.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant has given his Bajaj Discovery two-wheeler bike No.AP22 AK 6298 to OP on 19-3-2014 for oil servicing. The OP has changed the lying spare parts of the said bike and collected additional huge bill amount. The complainant was abused in the name of his caste by OP and his persons threatened the life of the complainant when he enquired about the said huge bill amount. The complainant was cheated by OP though the complainant being a Journalist and then could understand that how the common human beings were being cheated. The bill was to be issued by show room people for Rs.1,780/-. In fact, the bill was issued for oil servicing for Rs.370/-, break liners for Rs.163/-, oil seals for Rs.38/- and the labour charge for Rs.170/-, accordingly the total bill comes to Rs.741/-. But the OP has charged additionally for Rs.1,133/- under different heads though the said bike not having any problem. The complainant has sustained physically and mentally and shocked for the attitude of OP. The complainant has quantify Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation in addition to transport charges and protection from OP by taking action as per law.
3. The opposite party has refused to receive the notice from this Forum and remains set exparte throughout the proceedings.
4. During enquiry, the complainant filed his affidavit as evidence and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-6 documents and closed his evidence.
5. Heard arguments.
6. The points for consideration are:-
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of OP?
- To what relief?
7. Point Nos.1 and 2:- The case of the complainant is that he is owner and possessor of the Bajaj Discovery Motor Cycle bearing No.AP22 AK 6298 and having purchased the same in the month of July, 2012 year as per RTA Registration in Ex.A-4. There is a guarantee from Bajaj Auto Ltd., for repair, or replace at their authorized workshops on free of charge, part or parts thereof as may be found on examination, to have manufacturing defect within a period of 2 years or 30,000 Kms., whichever occurs earlier from the date of sale subject to fulfillment of condition stipulated in part A, B & C in Ex.A-3. Further the case of the complainant is that the OP workshop is authorized workshop at Kalwakurthy on behalf of Bajaj Auto Ltd. The OP has estimated the repairs of the said vehicle in Ex.A-2 and issued cash bill for Rs.1,780/- in Ex.A-1 which is not correct and exorbitant. The actual bill would be for Rs.741/- but not for Rs.1,780/-. The OP has collected additional huge amount of Rs.1,133/- from the complainant in a cheating manner and threatened the life of complainant with dire consequences and abused him in filthy language in the name of his caste.
8. In order to prove his case, the complainant filed his own affidavit as evidence and relied upon Exs.A-1 to A-6 documents.
9. We have gone through the entire record and perused the exhibits A-1 to A-6 documents. Ex.A-1 is the cash bill for Rs.1,780/- issued by OP showing the various charges for repair of the vehicle. Ex.A-2 showing estimation of repairs in Job Card No.457 in the name of Sai Krishna Motors, Kalwakurthy. The amount of Rs.1,780/- is showing in both Exs.A-1 and A-2. The Ex.A-3 is showing warranty from Bajaj Auto Ltd., at their authorized workshops. No doubt the vehicle of the complainant is covering warranty as per Ex.A-3 for repair or replace of the part or parts at authorized workshops if such part or parts found to be manufacturing defect on examination. The repairs in Exs.A-1 and A-2 are not showing any manufacturing defects. The case of the complainant also not for the manufacturing defects of the vehicle but it is only excess charged for Rs.1,780/- than the real required to be charged for Rs.741/-. On perusal of Exs.A-1 and A-2, the OP has charged for Rs.962/- under the head of spare parts but not disclosed the details of spare parts. There is huge amount of Rs.500/- charged for labour and also collected Rs.100/- as bus charges which could not be treated as part of charges for repairs of the vehicle. Therefore we are inclined to accept the version of the complainant that the OP has charged more than required under Exs.A-1 and A-2 and he is liable to return the additional huge amount of Rs.1,039/- with interest.
10. The complainant has not filed any record to show that he has spent an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- for his treatment. The complainant also not adduced any evidence that the original parts of vehicle were changed by OP. This Forum has no jurisdiction to enquire and decide the other charge/claim under abused in filthy language in the name of caste, life threatening and put out forcibly from the shop.
11. In view of aforesaid discussion and findings, we are of the considered view that there is a deficiency of service on the part of OP in charging the repairs of vehicle of the complainant under Exs.A-1 and A-2 is excessive and exorbitant. Therefore the OP is liable to pay Rs.500/- as compensation towards deficiency of service along with return of excess amount of Rs.1,039/- under Exs.A-1 and A-2 with interest and costs.
12. IN THE RESULT:- The complaint is allowed in part as under:-
- The OP is directed to return the excess amount of Rs.1,039/- with 9% interest under Exs.A-1 and A-2 from the date of Ex.A-1 dated 24-3-2014 till realization to the complainant.
- The OP is further directed to pay Rs.500/- as compensation towards deficiency of service to the complainant.
- The OP also further directed to pay Rs.1,000/- to the complainant as costs of the complaint.
