Punjab

Rupnagar

CC/22/58

Nem Dass - Complainant(s)

Versus

Punjab Tyre Service - Opp.Party(s)

24 Mar 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

RUPNAGAR

Consumer Complaint No.        :58 of 25.04.2022

             Date of Decision                     :24.03.2023

 

Nem Dass aged about 47 years son of Loka Ram Resident of Village Lamlehri, PO Ganguwal, Tehsil Sri Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar.

                                                                                                ….Complainant

Versus

 

Punjab Tyre Service, #18, Railway Road, Nangal Dam, Tehsil Nangal, District Rupnagar through its Proprietor/owner.

      …Opposite Party

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act.

 

QUORUM:

SH.KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

SH.RAMESH KUMAR GUPTA, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant             :         Sh.HemantChaudhary, Advocate

For OP                           :         Sh.Paramjit Singh, Advocate

 

ORDER

PER  KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

 

1. In the present complaint, the counsel for complainant has averred that complainant purchased four tyres (MRF No.155/70/13) with alloy for his vehicle i.e. Alto K10 bearing registration No.PB12-AD-2771 from OP on 03.09.2021 amounting to Rs.21,000/- and bill No.1645 dated 03.09.2021 issued by OP regarding purchase of said tyres and OP given five year warranty regarding said tyres.  On 11.09.2021, when complainant was going to Rupnagar alongwith his family members in said vehicle, then in the area of Bunga Sahib, one tyre of said vehicle was blow out/blasted and the complainant in a very difficulty saved said vehicle from road accident, otherwise any kind of misshaping i.e. life threatening may be occurred with the complainant alongwith his family members.  After that, complainant with Harminder son of Sh.Gurmeet Singh of Village Lamlehri approached the OP and narrated whole said incident and the complainant handover said tyre to OP and OP assured the complainant that he will send the said tyre to company, if the company replaced the same, the OP will give new tyre to complainant.  Complainant many times requested OP to give new tyres to him, but nothing was done. Complainant also sent legal notice to OP on 20.09.2021 but OP not replied the said notice.  Lastly, prayer has been made that the OP be directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as damages and to replace the tyres with new one or to refund the entire amount with interest and also to pay Rs.15,000/- as cost of complaint.
2. OP has appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that complaint is not maintainable; complainant has no locus standi; complainant has not come to the court with clean hands; no cause of action; complainant has not arrayed the manufacturer of tyre as party.  On merits, other averments of complaint are denied and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties produced on the file their respective documents.
4. We have heard learned the parties with their valuable assistance and have also gone through the record carefully.
5. This is an admitted fact that the tyres of the above said vehicle got damaged as per version of the complainant.  However, OP refused to replace the same for the reason that complainant has failed to implead the manufacture of the company or also failed to produce the defective tyre with OP for sending the same to manufacturer of the tyre.
6. As such, no cause of action has arisen against OP as the tyres were in warranty period and it was liability of the manufacturer only to replace the same, hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP and complaint against the said OP is liable to be dismissed.
7. By taking lenient view, the complaint is disposed of with the direction to complainant to submit the tyre in dispute with OP and further the OP is directed to contact the manufacturer of the tyre in dispute and settle the dispute as the tyre in dispute was in warranty period at the time of filing of this complaint
8. OP is directed to comply with the order within 45 days from the receipt of copy of the order.
9. Copies of the order be sent to the parties, as permissible, under the rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

Dated:24.03.2023

          (Ramesh Kumar Gupta)                  (Kuljit Singh)

          Member                                           President