D.O.F:23/10/2019
D.O.O:18/02/2022
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.No.210/2019
Dated this, the 18th day of February 2022
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M: MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
Narasimha Bhat, aged 64 years,
S/o Govinda Bhat,
Anugraha, Pathanadka,
P.O. Kotoor 671542 : Complainant
Muliyar Village, Kasaragod Taluk and District.
And
1.Rajesh Kumar, Aged about 50 years,
Proprietor, Swasthik Auto Mobiles,
Industrial Estate, Vidyanagar – 671123,
Kasaragod Taluk and District.
2. The Proprietor : Opposite Parties
Car Automobiles,
Industrial Estate,
Vidyanagar – 671123
Kasaragod Taluk and District.
ORDER
SMT.BEENA.K.G: MEMBER
The complainant is alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Parties as they failed to cure the defects of his car after many repairs and collecting repair charge.
The brief facts of the case of Sri. Naramsinha Bhat is that he is the registered owner of Chevrolet Beat car bearing No: KL 14 P- 9648 on 01/05/2019 the complainant took the vehicle to Opposite Party No:1 as the front wheels over heat with no break. On 04/05/2019 the Opposite Party delivered the vehicle claiming all the defects cured so the complainant paid Rs. 7,480/- as repair charge and took delivery of the vehicle. Immediately after some time some other complaints re surfaced and the complainant took the vehicle to Opposite Party No:1 on 21/05/2019 Opposite Party No:1 again delivered the vehicle declaring all the defects cured and the complainant paid Rs. 6244/- as repair charge on 25/03/2019. Thereafter on 20/06/2019 again the vehicle had some minor problem and the complainant entrusted the vehicle to Opposite Party No:1, they rectified the problem and delivered the vehicle on 23/06/2019 and collected Rs. 4100/- as repair charge. Again on 29/08/2019 complainant took the vehicle to Opposite Party No:1 for a minor problem and after repair paid Rs. 1500/- as repair charge. Opposite Party No: 1 gave some bills to the complainant allegedly issued by Opposite Party No:2 for the spare parts claimed to have fitted in the said vehicle. Even though Opposite Party No: 1 was supposed to return the old spare parts to the complainant but he had never done so. Complainant understood that Opposite Party No:1 has not carried out the repair properly so he was constrained take the vehicle to Chevrolet service centre at Manglore for proper repair. There the problem of the vehicle was rectified and cured, surprisingly learned that the spare parts alleged to have been fitted by the Opposite Party No: 1 were of low quality and some were obsolete. Complainant was constrained to spend Rs. 32,553/- as additional repair charge at the service centre Mangalore. Due to the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Parties complainant was constrained to pay all together Rs. 51,887/- for repair excluding other miscellaneous expenses which caused huge loss and mental agony to the complainant. Hence the complainant is seeking a compensation of Rs. 60,000/- for damages and Rs. 40,000/- for mental agony along with the cost of the proceedings.
Advocate Babuchandran.K filed vakalath and version for Opposite Party No: 1and No.2. In the version Opposite Parties admitted that complainant is the registered owner of the Chevrolet beat car No- KL- 14 P 9648 and on 01/05/2019 complainant took the vehicle to Opposite Party No:1 with the complaint that the front wheels overheat and the break failure. But Opposite Party No:1 denied that the Opposite Party No: 1 claimed all the defects were rectified and complainant paid Rs. 7480/- and took the delivery of the vehicle and immediately after some time complaint resurfaced again and the vehicle was taken to Opposite Party No:1 on 21/05/2019 and Opposite Party again claimed that all the defects rectified and the complainant has paid Rs 6244/- on 23/052019 and took the delivery of the vehicle. But again car was not running properly and the complainant took the vehicle to Opposite Party No:1 for the third time on 20/06/2019, for a minor problem and again he claimed to have rectified the problem on 23/06/2019 and the complainant has paid Rs 4100/- and took delivery of the vehicle still the complaints were not properly rectified. Hence the complainant took the vehicle to Opposite Party No:1 on 21/08/2019 and paid Rs. 1500/- when the complainant asked the reason for re occurring the problem even after many repairs Opposite Party told that now the repair work is perfectly carried out and there is no scope for any problem and Opposite Party No:1 gave some bills allegedly issued by Opposite Party No:2 for the spare parts claimed to have fitted in the said vehicle and Opposite Party No:1 was supposed to return the old spare parts to the complainant but Opposite Party No:1 never done so.
Even after the above said repair also the complaints of the vehicle were not rectified and the complainant took the vehicle for repair at the Chevrolet service center at Mangalore and there the problem of the vehicle was rectified but surprisingly the spare parts alleged to have been fitted was of low quality and some were obsolete. All the allegation in the complaint against Opposite Parties were false and there was no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Parties, Opposite Parties are not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant.
The Opposite Parties further submits that Opposite Parties have done some minor repair work relating to the vehicle belongs to the complainant. Opposite Parties had neither removed nor replaced any spare parts. The Opposite Parties advised the complainant to take the vehicle to the Chevrolet service centre at Mangalore but the complainant insisted Opposite Party No:1 to repair the vehicle without the replacing the spare parts. The manufacturing company of cheverolet beat stopped the production of the said model long back and thus spare parts are not available in open market and it will be available only in authorized service centers only. Therefore this Honourable Forum may pleased to dismiss the complaint with compensatory cost in the interest of justice.
The complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination Ext A1 to
A6 marked. The issues raised for consideration are:-
1. Whether there is deficiency in service/unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Parties as alleged in the complaint.
2. Whether the complaint is entitled for relief?
3. If so what is the relief?
For convenience issue No: 1 and 2 can be discussed together.
The complainant, the owner of Chevrolet Beat car bearing No: KL-14 P 9648 had some issues relating to the smooth running of the vehicle. As soon as the issue arise he approached Opposite Party No:1 with the vehicle for proper repair. All the occasions he had paid repair charge before taking delivery of the vehicle. He paid the repair charges with bonafiled intention that the defects might have cured. But immediately after one week another issue arises. Likewise he approached Opposite Party No:1 with the vehicle thrice in may 2019 and subsequently in June also. Opposite Party No:1 made the complainant to believe that some of the spare parts replaced and charged for the spare parts. At last fed up with the continuous problem of the vehicle complainant was constrained to take the vehicle to Chevrolet service centre at Mangalore for proper repair. From there he came to know that the spare parts alleged to have been fitted by Opposite Party No: 1 were of law quality and some were obsolete. Then only complainant realized that Opposite Parties were in collusion with each other received huge amount from the complainant in different heads of repair charge he was constrained to take the vehicle for repair to Opposite Party No:1 four times continuously trusting him. But Opposite Party was not rectified the problems properly, but charged highly. Because of the unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Parties complainant could not use the vehicle for months. The complainant had spend Rs.32, 553/- for repair, in the service centre of Opposite Party all together he had to spend Rs. 51887/- for repair excluding other miscellanies expenses.
We carefully gone through the affidavit of the complainant ,version, and documents. Ext A1 is the cash bill issued by Opposite Party No:1 on 03/05/2019 , Ext A2 is the cash bill Dated 03/04/2019.Ext A3 cash bill dated 03/05/2019 Ext A4 cash bill Dt 22/06/2019, Ext A5 cash bill Dt: 22/03/2019 Ext A6 cash bill Dt: 22/05/2019. While perusing the documents we are of the view that the allegation of the complainant is true that the Opposite Parties were deceiving the complainant by not properly repairing his vehicle and collecting illegal charges. Opposite Parties failed to cure the defects properly instead they charged highly from the complainant. They alleged to have fitted some spare parts which are of low quality and somewhere obsolete. These spare parts supplied by Opposite Party No:2. All these amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Certainly the complainant is entitled for relief.
Complainant is seeking compensation of Rs. 60,000/- and Rs. 40,000/- for mental agony from Opposite Party No:1. But we are not in a position to allow the prayer as it is without any basesis ..
The Complainant is entitled to get a reasonable compensation from opposite party no 1,considering the facts and circumstances of this case we are of the view that an amount of Rs 15000/- is a reasonable compensation in this case. Hence complainant is entitled to get compensation of Rs. 15,000/- from Opposite party no 1 with Rs. 5000/- as cost.
Therefore complaint is partly allowed directing Opposite Party no 1 to pay a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) to the complainant with Rs. 5000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) cost.
The time for compliance is 30 days from the receipt of this order.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1- Cash Bill Dt: 03/05/2019
A2- Cash bill Dt: 03/05/2019
A3- Labour bill Dt: 03/05/2019
A4- Cash bill Dt: 22/06/2019
A5- Cash bill Dt: 22/03/2019
A6- Cash Bill Dt: 22/05/2019
Witness Examined
P. Narasimha Bhat
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Assistant Registrar
Ps/
