Haryana

Ambala

CC/361/2018

Reena Devi - Complainant(s)

Versus

S.D. Trading Corporation - Opp.Party(s)

Mewa Ram

04 Dec 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

 

                                                          Complaint case No.:  361 of 2018.

                                                          Date of Institution           :   02.11.2018.

                                                          Date of decision    :   04.12.2019.

Reena Devi daughter of Shri Jagir Singh, aged about 32 years, resident of Village and Post Office Segti, Tehsil & District Ambala.

                                                                                       …. Complainant.                                                Versus

1. S.D.Trading Corporation, Government Polytechnic Chowk, Ambala City through its Proprietor.
2. Jasmit Automobile, Hissar Road, Matheri Shekhan, Ambala.
3. Honda Motorcycle & Scooter India Pvt. Ltd., Commercial Complex II, Sector 49-50, Golf Course Extension Road, Gurugram, Haryana.

 

               ..…. Opposite Parties.

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member,

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.         

                            

Present:       Shri Mewa Ram, Advocate, counsel for complainant.

Shri Gurpreet Singh Antal, Advocate, counsel for the OPs.

         

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President

Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’), praying for issuance of following direction to them:-

1. To replace the Activa with new one.
2. To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, physical harassment & financial loss suffered by her.
3. To pay Rs.22,000/- as litigation expenses.
   382.  

Any other relief which this Hon’ble Forum may deem fit.

 

Brief facts of the case are that the complainant had purchased a White Colour Honda Activa bearing registration No.HR-01AS-4543 from the OPs, in the month of July 2018. She purchased said Activa by taking loan from Manappuram Finance Company. After some time of its purchase, the colour of the activa started changing & deep colour appeared over the white colour, which was visible with naked eyes.  In this regard, she approached the OPs, it was told her that this problem occurred due to weather.  The OPs changed some parts like Tapa, Murgad of both side etc. of the said Activa and assured that in future she will not face the said problem again.  However after some time, same problem again occurred and she again contacted the OPs.  This time the OPs, told her that the problem of colour is due to some manufacturing default and refused to do anything. The said act of the OPs, amounts to deficiency in service. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed written version raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability; suppression of true facts and not coming to this Forum with clean hands. On merits, it is stated that the colour of the Activa was not changed, but for the satisfaction of the complainant, the OP No.2 replaced the Murgad of Activa. Whenever the complainant contacted them, best services were provided upto her satisfaction.  The OPs, never told the complainant that the problem of colour change is due to manufacturing default and never refused to do the needful.  The OP No.3 is highly reputed manufacturing company and its products are of high standard. Whenever, the complainant visited the OP No.2, she was duly attended and service was done upto her satisfaction. The complainant has not produced any cogent evidence, to prove her case. Even, she has not placed on record any report of some expert, as required under the Section 13 (1) (c to g) of the Act. Hence, the present complaint may be dismissed with heavy costs.

3.                The ld. counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of complainant as Annexure CW1/A alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 to C-6 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs tendered affidavit of Shri Suresh Grover son of Shri Baldev Raj Grover, Manager of M/s S.D.Trading Corporation, Ambala City, as Annexure OPA alongwith document Annexure OP1/1 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.

4.                We have heard the learned counsel for parties and carefully gone through the case file.

5.                Admittedly, complainant purchased the activa in question from the OP No.1, vide invoice dated 18.06.2018, Annexure C-3. From the job sheet dated 12.07.2018 Annexure C-4/OP-1, it is apparent that the body colour paint problem of the activa in question occurred for the second time and the OP No.2, changed the body cover. The learned counsel for the complainant has contended that even the colour of the said changed body cover also got changed. To corroborate this fact, the complainant has placed on record the photographs of her Activa, Annexure C-5 and C-6. The learned counsel for the OPs has contended that that there was no change in the colour of the activa in question and the OPs changed the body cover of the Activa as a goodwill gesture. We do not find any force in this contention of the OPs because no cogent and convincing evidence has been produced by them, to prove this fact. From the documents placed on record it is quite clear that there is change in the colour of the body cover of the activa in question. As such, we do not hesitate to conclude that there was some defect in the colour of the body cover of the activa in question.  The OPs are thus not only liable to replace the body cover of the activa in question but are also liable to compensate the complainant for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by her alongwith litigation expenses. So far as, the prayer made by the complainant for replacement of the activa in question cannot be accepted, because the complainant has complained about the colour and not regarding any mechanical defect in the activa in question. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that OP No.3 being manufacturer is liable to provide the original/genuine body cover to the OP No.2 free of costs. The OP No.2 being service centre is liable to replace the defective body cover with the original/genuine body cover provided by the OP No.3. 

6.                In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby allow the present complaint against the OPs. They are directed as under:

1. The OP No.3 being the manufacture is directed to provide the genuine/original body cover of the Activa in question to the OP No.2, free of costs for replacement.
2. The OP No.2 being the service centre, is liable to replace the body cover with the new/genuine body cover provided by the OP No.3 of the Activa in question, free of costs.
3. The OPs are jointly and severally directed to pay Rs.6,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the her and Rs.3,000/- as  litigation expenses.

 

                   The OPs are further directed to comply with the order within the period of 45 days, from the receipt of the certified copy of this order. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced on :04.12.2019.

                                      

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)            (Ruby Sharma)     (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                                  Member             President