IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM
Dated this the 7th day of February 2023
Present: Sri. Manulal.V.S, President
Smt.Bindhu.R, Member
Sri. K.M.Anto, Member
CC No.267/2021 (Filed on 08/11/2021)
Complainant : Rejeena Nazar,
W/o T.M.Abdul Nazar
Thazhathedathu House,
Pathanadu, Kangazha Village
Changanassery Taluk-686 541
(By Adv.K.S.Asif)
Vs
Opposite parties : 1. Tata Motors Passenger Vehicles Ltd,
4th floor Ahura Centre
82 Mahakali Caves Road, MIDC
Andheri East, Mumbai-400093
2. Deputy General Manager
Regional Customer Care
PBBU South 4,
Tata Motors Passenger Vehicles Ltd 4th Floor , Liv N Tower
Opp.Gold Souk, Vytilla
Cochin- 682019
(Tata Motors Ltd amended as per
IA order 226/2022 as Tata Motors Passenger Vehicles Ltd)
(By Adv.P.C.Chacko)
3. M.K.Motors, Kodimatha
Changanassery Road, Kottayam-686013
(By Adv.Siby Chenappady)
O R D E R
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
The complaint is filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.
The brief of the complainant’s case is as follows. The complainant purchased a Tata Harrier Vehicle vide Reg No.KL.33H.2684 on 27.12.2019 from the third opposite party. The complainant had paid Rs.17,70,847/- for the purchase of the vehicle. The opposite parties had offered warranty for 2 years for the vehicle.
The vehicle showed complaints right from the initial dates. The back door lock of the vehicle was not working properly. The complainant approached the third opposite party for repair of the vehicle. The third opposite party asked the complainant to lift the vehicle to their service Centre with the help of a crane. The complainant fixed the complaint with the help of a local mechanic.
Thereafter there was a problem of break light and that was also not fixed by the third opposite party. The third opposite party informed that due to corona issues they didn’t have technicians to solve the problem.
Then again, the accelerator of the car got stuck and abruptly the clutch got released. The vehicle was having mechanical issues in clutch, break, and accelerator including accelerator pedal. The complainant dropped the vehicle at the service Centre of the third opposite party in the end of June. The third opposite party returned the vehicle after repair in the middle of July. The same complaint recurred again and the vehicle was garaged in the workshop of the third opposite party. The third opposite party acted indifferently and the complainant lodged a complaint against them before the second opposite party.
After repeated enquiry the third opposite party informed that the high- pressure pump, cylinder head and three injectors of the vehicle got damaged and the replacement would cost around Rs.1,40,000/-. The third opposite party alleged that the complaint was due to the use of diesel with water content and dust in the vehicle.
The complainant raised the matter before the first and second opposite parties. All these complaints occurred during the period of warranty. The opposite parties are bound to rectify the defects free of cost. The vehicle was periodically serviced at the third opposite party’s service Centre without any delay. The diesel filter and oil filter were regularly changed in service.
On 30/09/2021 the vehicle was returned to the complainant after charging Rs.64,489/- for the repair works. On verification of the issued bill, it was found that the third opposite party fixed the issue in a local workshop.
The request for a spare vehicle was not accepted by the opposite parties. The complainant was forced to rent a vehicle for all the 45 days while the vehicle was garaged. It was due to the manufacturing mechanical defects and improper service, the complaint occurred. The opposite parties were bound to replace the defective parts free of cost as the defect happened in warranty period.
The act of the opposite parties is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. The complaint is filed for getting the refund of the amount of Rs.64,489/- spent for the repair work of the vehicle and for getting the rent paid to taxies and compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for mental agony and hardships with cost Rs.10,000/-.
On admission of the complaint copy of the complaint was duly served to the opposite parties.
The first and second opposite party filed a joint version. The third opposite party also filed their version. The version of the first and second opposite parties are as follows. The relationship between the first opposite party and third opposite party is of principal-to-principal basis and the first opposite party is not responsible for the alleged transactions between the complainant and third opposite party.
During the period from 30/12/2020 to 07/12/2021 whenever the complainant had taken the car to the workshop of the third opposite party with complaints, the third opposite party had carried out necessary repairs under warranty where ever applicable.
With regard to the payment of Rs.64,489/- on 30/09/2021 after repair is because the cause for the repairs had been necessitated owing to the adulterated fuel used by the complainant against repeated advice of the third opposite party leading to the damage of fuel injection pump (FIP) and ancillary parts.
The complainant/Driver had given necessary approval for carrying out the repairs on payment basis. The authorized service Centre of the manufacturer of the FIP was made available to the third opposite party. A new FIP with its ancillary parts made available on payment of Rs.39,964/- and Rs.22,525/- being the repair charges and fuel charges to the third opposite party. The complainant had paid a total of Rs.64,489/- without any demur and she is not entitled to seek for a refund of the said amount. The complainant is not eligible for any relief sought in the complaint.
The version of the third opposite party is that the complainant purchased a Tata Harrier car on 31.12.2019 for an amount of Rs.14,16,024/-. The complainant paid Rs.17,71,261/- including Road Tax, Insurance, TCS, Extended Warranty etc. The vehicle has no manufacturing defect. Whenever the customer approached the service center the third opposite party serviced the vehicle with utmost care and satisfaction of the complainant. The complainant had not approached with a complaint for the back door of the car. The complainant had never pointed out issue with break light of the vehicle. There was also no problem with clutch and accelerator of the car.
The customer brought the vehicle on 17.08.2021 due to starting trouble. On verification of the vehicle the third opposite party found that the defect has occurred due to fuel contamination and not due to any manufacturing defect.
The complainant agreed for a service and third opposite party charged Rs.22,525/- and also done recommended job approved by the complainant. Though the vehicle was in warranty period, the complainant paid an amount of Rs.39,964/- for repairing the high-pressure pump and injectors directly to the local vender since the damage was caused by the use of contaminated fuel.
The damage caused due to the carelessness of the complainant will not be covered by warranty given by the first opposite party. The third opposite party had not committed any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice.
The complainant filed proof affidavit and marked documents Ext A1 to A5. The third opposite party filed proof affidavit and marked documents B1 and B2.
The first opposite party also filed proof affidavit.
On going through the complaint and version of the opposite parties and evidence adduced we would like to consider the following points.
- Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
- If so, what are the reliefs and costs?
For the sake of convenience, we would like to consider point No.1 and 2 together.
Points 1 and 2
On the basis of the complaint and version of the opposite parties and evidence on record it is clear that the complainant had purchased the Tata Harrier vehicle manufactured by the first opposite party from the third opposite party on 27/12/2019.The vehicle was registered before Sub RTO Changanassery on 20/01/2020 with Reg No. KL-33M2684. Ext A1 is the copy of the RC Book, Engine No.46336890-4037613 and Chassis No. MAT631121KPD56257.
Ext.A2 is the warranty terms and conditions. As per Ext A2 the warranty shall be for a period of 2 years from the date of sale of the car or a mileage of 1,00,000 kms whichever occurs earlier. Ext.A3 is the estimate issued by the third opposite party to the complainant on 29/09/2021 for an amount of Rs.22,525/- being the labour charges for the vehicle KL.33 M 2684. Ext.A4 is the Copy of Invoice No.S/153/20-21 dated 22/09/2021 and issued by Diesel India (Diesel Clinic), Kottayam to M.K Motors charging Rs.6,254/- being the labour charges for Pump and Injector for the vehicle KL.33M 2684. Ext.A5 is the copy of invoice No.D/123/20-21 dated 22/09/2021 issued by Diesel India (Diesel Clinic) Kottayam to M K Motors for an amount of Rs.33,710/- being the cost for valve set H.P seal, Cylinder head, etc. for the vehicle Kl.33.M 2684.
Ext.B1 is the service History of the vehicle KL33M 2684, and Ext.B2 is the photographs showing water and mud in fuel collected from fuel filter bowl and condition of fuel filter.
As per Ext A2 warranty conditions The Tata Harrier vehicle and parts manufactured by first opposite party had 2 years warranty from the date of purchase or a mileage of 1,00,000 kms whichever is earlier.
The exceptions for the warranty are Tires, Batteries, Audio and or Video equipment (if any) etc not manufactured by the first opposite party but supplied by other parties this warranty shall not apply, but buyers of the car shall be entitled to so far as permissible by law all such rights the company may have against such parties under the warranty in respect of such parts.
This warranty is not applicable if the car or any part is repaired or altered by any person other than from the sales or service establishments. This warranty shall not cover normal wear parts, drive belts, hoses, wiper blades fuses, clutch disc, brake shoes, brake pads, cables and all rubber parts.
The warranty terms and conditions also give few tips for driving, which includes Monitor fuel consumption regularly and if showing rising trend get the car immediately attended at company’s authorized service outlets and use only recommended grades and specified quantity of lubricants. Ensure that fuel filter, oil filter and breather are checked periodically and replaced if required as recommended by the company.
Thus, it is clear that the first opposite party had not given any instructions in the Ext A2 warranty terms and conditions regarding the use of fuel of any particular standard and quality in the vehicle.
Even though the third opposite party claimed that the pressure pump, cylinder head and injectors of the vehicle of the complainant got damaged due to the use of contaminated fuel in the vehicle no expert evidence is adduced by the opposite parties that the fuel used in the vehicle was contaminated
The vehicle was purchased by the complainant on 31/12/2019 and the vehicle reported with the complaint before the third opposite party on 17/08/2021 with 26462 Kms. Thus, it is clear that the vehicle was within the warranty period. The opposite parties are bound to provide the repair works of the vehicle under warranty.
Even though the complainant claims for taxi fare for the period where the vehicle was garaged with the third opposite party, no evidence is produced by the complainant to prove the taxi fares.
On the basis of the above findings it is clear that the opposite parties failed to do the repair works of the vehicle free of cost under warranty. This act of the opposite parties is clearly deficiency in service on their part.
We allow the complaint and pass the following orders.
- The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.64,489/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order in default to pay 9% interest till realization.
- The third opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and sufferings to the complainant with cost Rs.3,000/-.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 7th day of February 2023.
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member sd/-
Sri. Manulal.V.S, President sd/-
Smt.Bindhu.R, Member sd/-
Appendix
Exhibits marked from the side of complainant.
A1- Copy of RC Book.
A2- Copy of vehicle warranty – terms and conditions.
A3- Copy of estimate.
A4- Copy of invoice No.S/153/20-21, dated 22.09.2021.
A5- Copy of invoice No.D.123/20-21, dated 22.09.2021.
Exhibits marked from the side of opposite parties.
B1- Copy of service history.
B2- Photographs of the vehicle.
By order
sd/-
Assistant Registrar
