The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.Ps, where O.P No.1 is the Proprietor, SAI MOTORS, Rajpur, Jaleswar, Balasore and O.P No.2 is the Manager, Hero Moto Corp. Ltd., Delhi-Jaipur Highway, Dharuhera, Haryana. 

                    1. Factual matrix of the dispute is that the Complainant had purchased  one Motor cycle namely ‘GLAMOUR FI DSS CAST CANDY-Blazing Red’ for consideration of Rs.70,662/- (Rupees Seventy thousand Six hundred sixty two only) from the O.P No.1 on 16.08.2014 vide M.R No.653 dt.16.08.2014 bearing Regd. No.OD-01E-6973. After a few days of running, the said motor cycle found defective as noticed by the Complainant. The Complainant noticed the manufacturing defects in his vehicle such as:- when the Motor cycle is moving, unusual sound is emanating from the engine and the engine is quickly getting heated. The Complainant during the month of September and October-2014, requested the O.P No.1 for replacement or removal of defects, but the O.P No.1 did not pay any heed to it. Lastly the Complainant handed over a written complaint before the O.P No.1 on 18.10.2014, but the O.P No.1 neither acknowledged the written complaint nor initiated any steps for replacement/ removal of defects in the above said vehicle. Prayer for replacement of the said Motor cycle along with compensation for mental agony and financial loss.

                     2. The O.P No.1 through his Advocate appeared in the case, but did not prefer to file written version, but the O.P No.2 did not appear in the case, hence both the O.Ps are set ex-parte. Thereafter, the O.P No.1 filed written version on 09.05.2016.

                    3. On perusal of the case record and the documents filed by the Complainant available in this case, it is noticed that:-

(i) Copy of written complaint dt.18.10.2014 filed by the Advocate on behalf of the Complainant is not duly acknowledged by the O.P No.1.

(ii) The Complainant has also not filed any copy of written complaint for replacement of the defective vehicle as claimed by the Complainant to the O.P No.2 (the Manufacturer) in the instant case.

(iii) Moreover, the Complainant has also not filed any copy of warranty available for this vehicle along with its terms and conditions, which is supplied by the O.P No.1 to the Complainant at the time of purchase of said vehicle.

                   4. In view of the above averments of the Complainant and the documents available, it is argued on behalf of the Complainant that due to non-compliance of defect of the vehicle and non co-operation by the O.Ps for the same, the Complainant is entitled for replacement of the vehicle with a new vehicle along with compensation and cost.

                   5. On perusal of the record, the defects pointed out as mentioned earlier regarding warranty card and service letter regarding complain of the vehicle to the O.Ps. So for wanting of these two vital documents, the plea of the Complainant is not believable, for which this Forum is of the opinion that the Complainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed for and this Consumer case is liable to be dismissed. Hence Ordered:-  

                                                     O R D E R

                        The Consumer case is dismissed on ex-parte against the O.Ps.

                         Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 31st day of March, 2017 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.