Telangana

Khammam

CC/08/10

Kondapalli Jaganmohan Rao,S/O.Madhusudhan Rao,Age.39 yrs,Occ.Advocate,R/O.10-1-58 - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Authorised Dealer,Suguna Motors,D.No.15-4-59/1,Opp.Govt.Polytecnic SVP Road,Warangal - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

07 Jan 2009

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
OPPOSITE CSI CHURCH
VARADAIAH NAGAR
KHAMMAM 507 002
TELANGANA STATE
 
Complaint Case No. CC/08/10
 
1. Kondapalli Jaganmohan Rao,S/O.Madhusudhan Rao,Age.39 yrs,Occ.Advocate,R/O.10-1-58
Andhra Pradesh
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Authorised Dealer,Suguna Motors,D.No.15-4-59/1,Opp.Govt.Polytecnic SVP Road,Warangal
Andhra Pradesh
2. The Mithra Agencies Khammam
Warangal Cross Roads
Khammam
Andhra Pradesh
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. R. Kiran Kumar PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt.V.Vijaya Rekha MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

This C.C coming on before us for final hearing, on 30-12-2008 in the presence of  Sri. K.Jagan Mohan Rao,Advocate for Complainant,  and the opposite party No-1 called absent, and of   Sri. K.P.Satyanarayana Rao, Advocate for the opposite party No-2 ; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing arguments, and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following:-

 

ORDER

(Per Sri.K.V.Kaladhar, Member )

1.         This complaint is filed under section 12(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

2.         The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant has purchased Maruthi 800 CC Car vide bearing Chasis No.2564516 and Engine No.3592235 on 26-6-06.  With that new car the opposite party No-1 has provided battery of Exide Company vide SL.No.3C6-80742 on the very same day.  After lapse of 8 months the 3rd cell of said battery became weak.  For that the servicing station of opposite party at Khammam issued a letter vide dated 21-2-2007 to that effect.  The complainant has intimated the same to opposite party about the defect of the battery.  The opposite party has advised the complainant to contact local Excide dealer, upon which the complainant met the local dealer so many times from time to time and the local dealers checked the battery from time to time and found that it is in working condition, but the said battery given so much troubles for the complainant and causing lot of inconvenience from time to time to the complainant.  Vexed with that the complainant intimated the same to the local dealers and the opposite party, but they have given evasive reply for replacement of said battery.  Vexed with the attitude of the local dealers and opposite party the complainant has issued a notice to the opposite party on 1-9-07  requesting the opposite party to provide a new battery in place of defective battery, but the opposite party neither replaced the battery nor given any reply.  Hence this complaint.

            Hence, it is prayed that the Hon’ble Forum may be pleased to direct the opposite party to replace the defective Exide battery by providing new Exide Battery or to pay the cost of the said battery and also to pay Rs.50,000/- towards damages to the complainant for causing inconvenience and also to award costs of the complainant.

3.         The complainant  filed his affidavit along with the following documents;

Ex A1:A letter issued by opposite party No-2 to the Exide battery, Khammam dated 21-2-2007. Ex A2: A Notice issued by complainant to the opposite party No-1, dated 1-9-07. Ex A3: Courier receipt, dated 6-9-07. Ex A4: Maintenance service record of the above said car.

4.         The notice of opposite party No-1 served on 4-3-08 but the opposite party No-1 in spite of service of notice by this Forum did not file any counter.

5.         The opposite party No-2 filed  the following counter:

            The opposite party No-2 is not a necessary party to the complaint.  When the complainant brought the battery for routine service on 19-2-2007, this opposite party found that it was a low charged battery.  This opposite party improved charge to its standard specification.  Thereafter, the battery was sent to the local Exide Battery dealer at Khammam for warranty checkup and the same was informed to the complaint.  The complainant has unnecessarily impleaded this opposite party without any basis.

            Hence, it is prayed that the Hon’ble Forum may be pleased to pass necessary orders.

6.         The point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to the claim as prayed for?

7.         It is an admitted  fact that the complainant has purchased a car  from the opposite party No-1.  It is an admitted fact that as per Ex A1 the battery of 3rd cell weak.   It is also an admitted fact that as per the version of the opposite party No-2 the complainant approached the battery for service on 19-2-07 and opposite party No-2 found that it was a  low  charged battery.  The battery was sent to the local Exide battery dealer at Khammam for warranty check up.

8.         It is the contention of the complainant that he met the local dealer so many times from time to time but the trouble is not rectified.  And the complainant faced lot of inconvenience.

9.         When the customer purchased a new vehicle he will think that the new vehicle is defect free.  But the new vehicle is giving trouble within no time and within the warranty period it is the duty of the dealer or manufacturer of that vehicle to rectify the defect of the vehicle.  Here the complainant gave notice to the opposite party No-1.  In spite of receiving notice the opposite party No-1 did not respond.  That itself shows the negligent attitude of the dealer towards their customers, after the sale is completed.  That itself is a deficiency in service and negligence on the part of the opposite party No-1.

10.      Hence, we are of opinion that the Exide battery which was purchased by the complainant along with his car was defective one and it has to be replaced with a new one.  However we are not awarding any damages.  

11.      Hence, we direct the opposite party No-1 replace the defective Exide battery by providing new Exide battery.  The complainant is directed to hand over the defective Exide battery to the opposite party No-1.  Accordingly this C.C. is allowed without costs.  This complaint is dismissed against opposite party No-2.

 

12.      In the result, the C.C. is allowed, we direct the opposite party No-1replace the defective Exide battery by providing new Exide battery.  The complainant is directed to hand over the defective Exide battery to the opposite party No-1.  No costs.  This complaint is dismissed against opposite party No-2.

Dictated to the Stenographer, Corrected and pronounced by us, in this Forum on this 7th day of January, 2009.

                                                                                                             

                                                                            President       Member           Member

                                                                              District Consumers Forum, Khammam

                                                   

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED FOR

Complainant                                                                                                       Opposite parties                                                                                                                                                                  

      Nil                                                                                                           Nil

DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR

Complainant  

Ex A1:A letter issued by opposite party No-2 to the Exide battery, Khammam dated 21-2-2007.

Ex A2: A Notice issued by complainant to the opposite party No-1, dated 1-9-07.

Ex A3: Courier receipt, dated 6-9-07.

Ex A4: Maintenance service record of the above said car.

Opposite parties

 

Nil

 

 

 

  President                   Member             Member

                                                                              District Consumers Forum, Khammam

      

 

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. R. Kiran Kumar]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Smt.V.Vijaya Rekha]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.