BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAPURTHALA.

Complaint No. 102 of 2019

Date of Instt. 14.10.2019

Date of Decision:10.01.2020

Preeti Gupta W/o Rohit Gupta aged about 42 Years resident of 224 Model Town Kapurthala.

….....Complainant

Versus

M/s Rajput Motors, Circular Road, Near Aujla Fatak, Kapurthala through its Prop/Manager. .........Opposite parties

Complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act

Quorum: Before: S. Karnail Singh (President)

Mrs.Rajita Sareen (Member)

Present: Sh. Saket Gupta, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.

OP exparte.

Order

S.Karnail Singh (President)

1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein stated that she purchased a Hero Duet LX Scooter bearing registration No.PB-09-P-0011 having Engine No.JF33AAGGB36446, Chassis No.MBLJFGGB26328 from the respondent on 31.03.2016. The complainant and her husband is using the said vehicle from the date of its purchase for their personal use. The vehicle was having some technical problems since the day of its purchase and the complainant used to rectify it from the respondent being the authorized service centre of Hero Company. That in the month of August 2019 the above said scooter started giving problem from the backside as there was some problem in the wheel and the vehicle was giving bubbling while driving and the respondent advised the complainant to replace the Rim of the wheel and also found that the speedometer was not working. Upon which, the complainant requested the respondent to replace the Rim of the wheel along with the speedometer and also requested to install the side mirror for the above said scooter. That the respondent informed the complainant that the above said accessory is not readily available with the respondent, so the respondent is required to place an order to Hero Company and only after that they can provide the said spare-part.

2. That the husband of the complainant also sent emails to the Hero company to provide the above said spare-parts as the vehicle is highly and urgently required as the work of the husband was suffering from day to day and even till date, it is suffering for the non-availability of the vehicle as the vehicle cannot be driven having the bubbling problem in the wheel. On 17.09.2019, the representative of the respondent informed the complainant that the spare-part is going to be available within one or two days so the complainant is required to deposit a sum of Rs.1000/- in advance for the above said spare-parts and when the vehicle would be ready after installing the said spare-part, the final bill will be settled at that time. Upon that assurance, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.1000/- with the respondent and the respondent issued a receipt No.388 dated 17.09.2019 and assured the complainant that the vehicle will be ready within two or three days and will be delivered to the complainant after rectifying the problems and after fixing the said spare-parts. The respondent also sent SMS qua to the above said vehicle through Hero Company as and when the vehicle was got checked and received. It is important to mention here that the respondent took the vehicle of the complainant on 17.09.2019 after taking advance money of the spare-parts and since then the vehicle is lying with the respondent, due to which the complainant and her husband is suffering a lot as they are unable to enjoy the fruit of the vehicle. Due to non-availability of the said vehicle, the work of the husband of the complainant is also suffering as he is unable to supply the medicines as per his schedule. The respondent is lingering on the matter on one pretext or the other, which is clear cut case of deficiency in service and as such, the instant complaint filed with the prayer that the respondent may be directed to deliver the vehicle to the complainant after getting the work done within 24 hours after fixing all the required spare-parts in the said vehicle free of cost and further, OP be directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing mental harassment and agony to the complainant and further, OP be directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of work suffered by the husband of the complainant and further, OP be directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.25,000/- and be also directed to refund the advance money obtained from the complainant i.e. Rs.1000/-.

3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, but despite service OP failed to appear and ultimately, OP was proceeded against exparte.

4. In order to prove her exparte claim, the complainant produced on the file certain documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-13 at the time of filing of the complaint.

5. We have heard the argument from the learned counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the case file very minutely.

6. After considering the over all circumstances as put before us by the counsel for the complainant, we find that initially responsibility is of the manufacturing firm to supply all the required/necessary spare-parts to the vehicle, which was launched by the said manufacturing company. Similarly, in this case, some parts were not available with the dealer i.e. OP and for that purpose, the OP told the complainant that spare-parts are not available, there-upon the complainant sent emails to the manufacturing firm, the said emails are Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-5 and in response to that emails, the said manufacturing firm gave a reply, vide email Ex.C-6 that the parts will be available very shortly. If the complainant remained intact with the manufacturing firm, for the entire period, then we can say without any hesitation that there was no deficiency on the part of the OP i.e. Rajput Motors, but the situation has been diverted by the OP itself by getting advance Rs.1000/- as price of the spare-parts on 17.09.2019 and vehicle in question also retained in the workshop for repairing and replacement of the spare-parts and thereafter role of the OP started and then we find the OP is required to deliver the vehicle to the complainant within a short period as soon as possible, but the OP did not bother despite receiving emails Ex.C-9 to Ex.C-12, even never bother to give reply to the said emails of the complainant and unnecessarily retained the vehicle of the complainant for a long time since September 2019, till today, which is apparently a grave negligence as well as deficiency on the part of the OP and moreover, the OP did not bother to appear to contest the instant complaint, which shows that there is some negligence on the part of the OP and as such, we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled for the relief claimed, being reason the version of the complainant remained un-rebutted and un-challenged, if so, then there is no earthly ground to discard the un-rebutted version of the complainant.

7. In the light of above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is exparte partly accepted and OP is directed to replace the spare-parts of the vehicle in question and then deliver the said vehicle to the complainant within 10 days from today. However, the OP can charge the price of the spare-parts because the vehicle is not within warranty period. For causing grave harassment and mental agony to the complainant, the OP is directed to pay compensation to the complainant, to the tune of Rs.15,000/- and also directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/-. It is further ordered that if the OP failed to comply the aforesaid order within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order, then OP will liable to pay interest @ 12% per annum on the above said amount of Rs.25,000/- from the date of filing complaint i.e. 14.10.2019, till realization. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated Rajita Sareen Karnail Singh

10/01/2020 Member President