Karnataka

Kolar

CC/78/2016

Mr.M.Puneeth - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Cheif Executive Officer & Managigng Director,Royal Enfield India - Opp.Party(s)

18 Apr 2017

ORDER

                Date of Filing: 21/10/2016

Date of Order: 18/04/2017

BEFORE THE KOLAR DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, D.C. OFFICE PREMISES, KOLAR.

 

Dated: 18^TH DAY OF APRIL 2017

PRESENT

SMT. PRATHIBHA.R.K., BAL LLM, PRESIDENT

SMT. A.C. LALITHA, BAL., LLB           ……  LADY MEMBER

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO :: 78 OF 2016

Sri. M.Puneeth,

S/o. M.Muniswamy,

#971/5, Near Gokul College,

NGO’s Layout,

Kolar-563 101.                                           ….  COMPLAINANT.

(In-person)

- V/s -

(1) The Chief Executive Officer

& Managing Director,

Royal Enfield India,

(A Unit of Eicher Motor Limited),

Tiruvottiyur High Road,

Tiruvottiyur, Chennai-600 019.

(Rep. by Sriyuth. R.B.Mruthyunjaya, Advocate)

 

(2) Jagadamba Automobiles,

(Royal Enfield Dealer)

Sy. No.16/3, Municipal Katha SAS No.167,

Ward No.14, Petechamanahalli Village,

Kolar-563 101.

(Rep. by Sriyuth. R.B.Mruthyunjaya, Advocate)            …. OPPOSITE PARTIES.

 

-: ORDER:-

 

BY SMT. A.C. LALITHA, LADY MEMBER

01.   The complainant having submitted this complaint on hand as envisaged Under Sections 11 & 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has sought reliefs against these Ops jointly and severally, for returning of the amount of Rs.1,70,000/- along with 18% interest which was paid towards purchase of the vehicle bearing temporary registration No. KA-07-TS-001191 and a sum of Rs.7,000/- which was spent on vehicle fuel during vehicle repair and a sum of Rs.2,000/- spent for first service, engine oil and consumables and a sum of Rs.50,000/- for loss of wages and a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards physical strain and mental agony and Rs.5,000/- costs has been sought.

 

02.   The facts in brief:-

(a)    It is contention of the complainant that, OP No.1 as two wheeler bike manufacturer and OP No.2 has branch office in Kolar as per the address mentioned in the cause-title, which sells the two wheeler bikes of OP No.1 manufactured.  The complainant had purchased the said vehicle a brand new Royal Enfield Himalayan Bike of Royal Enfield vide Invoice No.INV5869161700192, dated: 01.06.2016, chassis No. ME3D4A5C1GE002150, Engine No. D4A5C1GE002904, temporary registration No. KA-07-TS001191 from OP No.2 for a sum of Rs.1,70,000/-.

 

(b)    Further it is contended that, on 01.06.2016 at 08.00 pm the bike got delivered to him and found few defects during delivery, as it was closing time of OP No.2 the concerned authorities rushed out.  The very next day he visited OP No.2 and complained in regard to the oil leakage from engine head, very huge cranking and vibrating noise from engine, idling issue, chain loose, petrol leakage from carburetor, hard gear shift with gear jam, no co-ordination with gear shift and gear display, very weak rear breaking, problem with headlight and as alignment, two bolts missing on both the side bezels.  And OP No.2 authorities and employers of the showroom witnessed all these defects and assured that, these defects would be resolved during first service.

 

(c)    Further it is contended that, on 3^rd day of delivery i.e., on 03.06.2016 the sari guard of the bike got broken by itself and on 6^th day of delivery i.e., on 06.06.2016 vehicle got breakdown.  After complete inspection by OP No.2, found that, main fuse of 30A was blown out, and they replaced the same.  Again on 09.06.2016 the main fuse of 30A got blown out.  During bike inspection he noticed that, one wire from front side below the handle from ignition lock got burned out and found short circuit happened due to poor quality of wire.  OP No.2 failed to rectify the said defects even after 1^st service (on20.06.2016) also due to scarcity of new spares required and found rusting of parts during first service.

 

(d)    Further it is contended that, he approached OP No.1 by calling its customer care and through mailing and also sent notice on 26.08.2016, for which he got reply on 13.09.2016, stating as “No such problem reported after inspection” “problem can be rectified after servicing of the vehicle”, customer consent not provided”, but finally not rectified the said defects.  And due to false fitness certificate given by Ops the said bike is not registered for permanent registration.  And that, Ops sold defective vehicle by violating central motor vehicles rules 1988, Rule No.124 safety standards of components and Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1988, Rule No.127/quality certificate by manufacturer / Form 22.  So contending the complainant has come up with this complaint on hand to seek the above set-out reliefs.

 

03.   In response to the notice served the Ops have put in their appearance through their said learned counsel and have submitted written version resisting the claim of the complainant in toto.

 

(a)    It is contended that, the complainant has failed to mention the number of kilometers the vehicle has run after taking the delivery and not mentioned whether the said vehicle met with an accident or not or otherwise damaged by an act of the complainant himself.

 

(b)    And the bike purchased from OP No.2 has two years / 20,000 kilometers warranty and during the warranty period of the bike only defective parts of the vehicle are repaired or replaced free of cost and a new vehicle cannot be issued as per the warranty guidelines.

 

(c)    It is submitted that, the complainant had bought the said bike from OP No.2 on 13.06.2016 and also availed service on 28.06.2016 and also availed warranty repair services on 14.06.2016, 07.06.2016, 14.07.2016 and 18.07.2016.  During these periods the said bike repaired the problems in the bike.

 

(d)    It is contended that, on 18.07.2016 the complainant had brought the said bike to OP No.2 with a complaints as ‘Fork noise’ and ‘Hard gear shift’ and it was explained to him as all these problems will be easily rectified by servicing the bike and there is no manufacturing defects at all, but the complainant refused to get the servicing of the bike and he had not allowed OP No.2 technicians to inspect the bike and demanded for new bike or refund of the money.  And Ops specifically deny all other problems in the bike as alleged in the complaint.  And that under the circumstances there could be no deficiency in service, prayed for dismissal of this complaint, costs has been sought.

 

04.   The complainant has submitted his affidavit evidence and the following documents:-

1. copy of vehicle invoice
2. copy of vehicle temporary registration
3. 01 photo of a broken sari guard
4. 01 photo of a 30A blown fuse of the vehicle
5. 02 photos of short circuited wire from ignition lock.
6. 02 photos of vehicle on service ramp without proper mount and tools.
7. 09 photos showcasing  engine oil leakage from all-round Head & Body
8. 01 photo showcasing peel off inside paint of petrol tank
9. A compact Disc having visuals of Abnormal sounds
10. 05 photos of seat defect & Deformation
11. 20 photos showcasing rusting of parts, rusting of engine 03 photos, 01 photo of front shocks holder, Front & Rear Disc Brakes 04 photos, 03 photos of Tyre spokes and rim, 01 photo of chain, 02 photos of rear shocks, 05 photos of exhaust system, 01 photo of head light unit.
12. 01 photo of rear brake jam
13. 01 photo showcasing abnormality of tyre
14. 01 photo showcasing poor wire quality and short circuit
15. 02 photos showcasing breakdown of poor quality of front shocks
16. 02 photos showcasing accident happened due to rear brake jam
17. 04 photos showcasing accident due to poor quality of tyre and swing arm
18. 06 photos showcasing chassis manufacturing and material defects
19. Copy of a Notice served by Complainant to respondent with post details.
20. Copy of a reply by respondent and associates to the complainant’s notice
21. Copy of DD taken in favour of President, DCDRF, Kolar.
22. Copies of old and new price list of bike.
23. 02 photos of vehicle on service ramp without proper mount and tools
24. 02 photos of bike in total dead condition.
25. 02 photos of bike showing malfunctioning and defective meter.
26. Copies of 55 different complaints written to the OP by different customers relating to manufacture defects.
27. A copy of motor vehicles. (Amendment) bill 2016
28. 01 photo of a broken sari guard
29. 01 photo of a 30A blown fuse of the vehicle
30. 02 photos of a short circuited wire from ignition lock.
31. A copy of cash receipt and service invoice of first service.
32. A copy of job card gate pass.
33. Details of mail correspondence sent to Ops
34. 09 photos showing engine oil leakage from all round head and body.
35. 01 photo showing peel off inside paint of petrol tank
36. 05 photos of seat defects and deformation.
37. 20 photos showing rusting of parts, rusting of engine and other defects of photos
38. A copy of vehicle insurance
39. A copy of sales certificate
40. A copy of service invoice, job card, acknowledgment and cash memo.
41. A guideline Circular by OP dt.22.03.2016 regarding engine oil which company totally failed to put a proper engine oil in the new manufacture bike.
42. A circular by OP dt: 22.04.2016 to handle the different major manufacturing defects exists in brand new Himalayan bike.  In this circular 18 manufacturing defects are noticed.
43. A circular dt: 23.06.2016 by OP regarding replacement of clutch assy and rocker kit.  In the respective circular the OP clearly mention as a note that – “Don’t convey to any customer that it’s a recall/modification convey as regular maintenance.”
44. A circular dt: 17.10.2016 by OP regarding to manufacturing defects exists in Himalayan bike : “Himalayan Mandatory check sheet *** - 100 % to be checked and inspected, whenever Himalayan Vehicle is coming to workshop and during service time”.
45. A circular by OP to replace manufacture defective parts by new modified parts.
46. OP document “SOP for replacing modified rocker shaft Himalayan Motor Cycles” witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
47. OP document SOP for clutch Kit assy. Witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
48. OP document communication to field for explaining engine heat being felt higher as compared to 350cc.  Witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
49. OP document “SOP TO RESOLVE SAREE GUARD ISSUE” witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
50. OP document “SOP TO RESOLVE SIDE STAND HITTING TO CENTER STAND SPRINGS” Witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
51. OP document “SOP for dustcap falling issue” Witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
52. OP document “Rear chain rubbing to centre stand SOP to assemble center stand ADD-ON Plate” witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
53. OP document “SOP TO FIX FUEL LEAK FROM FLS MTG AREA” witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
54. OP document “SOP to avoid Rear Brake Pedal hitting with Exhaust Guard” witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
55. OP document “SOP for ensuring sprocket bolt Tightening torque” Witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
56. OP document “SOP for Tyre Cut” witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
57. OP document ‘SOP for SWINGARM REACTION BRACKET FAILURE” witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
58. OP document ‘SOP for Brake Pedal free play” witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
59. OP document “SOP to avoid front brake hose rubbing with mud guard” witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
60. OP document “Gear position sensor service procedure for erratic indication” witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
61. OP document “SOP for front wheel noise” witnesses that the manufacture defect exists.
62. Original report of vehicle inspection done on 29.03.2017

 

 

05.   On behalf of OP No.1 Sri. Thippesh, the authorized signatory of OP No.1 has put in his affidavit evidence and on behalf of OP No.2 Sri.Ravikumar, the authorized signatory of OP No.2 has put in his affidavit evidence and the following documents have been submitted on behalf of both the Ops:-

1) Service Invoice dt: 13.06.2016 Rs.932/- (free of cost)

2) Service Invoice dt: 21.06.2016 Rs.213/-(free of cost)

3) Service Invoice dt: 21.06.2016 Rs.173/-(free of cost)

4) Service Invoice dt: 29.06.2016 Rs.708/-(free of cost)

5) Service Invoice dt: 14.07.2016 Rs.1509/-(free of cost)

6) Delivery folder dt: 13.06.2016

7) Sales Invoice dt: 13.06.2016

8) Delivery Note

9) Insurance Copy

10) T.R. Challan for RTO, Kolar.

 

06.   Both parties submitted their written argument and heard oral arguments of both sides.

 

07.   Therefore the points that do arise for our consideration in this case are:-

(A) Whether the complainant proves that, the said vehicle New Royal Enfield Himalayan Bike, Temporary Registration No. KA-07-TS001191 so sold on the part of OP Nos.1 & 2 is defective?

(B) If so, whether the OP Nos.1 & 2 could be held as guilty of deficiency in service?

(C) If so, whether the complainant is entitled for the relief as he sought?

(D)  What order?

08.   Findings of this District Forum on the above stated points are:-

POINT (A):-          In the Affirmative

POINT (B):-          In the Affirmative

 

POINT (C):-          In the Affirmative

 

POINT (D):-          As per the final order

for the following:-

 

REASONS

POINT (A):-

09.   On perusal of the document such as sale invoice dated: 01.06.2016 issued by OP No.2, it is true that, the complainant had purchased a Royal Enfield Himalayan – Snow Bike vide Chassis No.ME3D4A5C1GE002150, Engine No. D4A5C1GE002904 and got Temporary Registration on 08.06.2016 at RTO, Kolar (Reliance placed on Annexure No.2: copy of vehicle’s temporary registration).

 

10.   The complainant contends as the very next day of purchase itself, he noticed some defects in the bike and approached OP No.2 but not rectified, the same continued and lead to dead condition of the said bike.

 

11.   Admittedly Ops states in its version as the complainant brought the said bike to OP No.2 service centre with some complaints on 07.06.2016, 13.06.2016, 14.06.2016, 14.07.2016, 18.07.2016 and 1^st service done on 28.06.2016.  If so again contends as the complainant had not allowed to service the bike to rectify the problems, this version of Ops cannot be believable. 

 

12.   On perusal of document such as “detailed vehicle inspection report dated: 29.03.2017 by Srikanth.C., Mechanical Engineer, it reveals that, the said bike is free from physical damages and recorded observations.  The relevant portion which reads thus:-

“3. Inspection Report:-

          The concerned bike is thoroughly investigated and found vehicle is totally free from physical damages and recorded below observations:-

 

1. Vehicle is completely in dead, breakdown condition
2. Vehicle didn’t start even after switching ignition key to On
3. Vehicle Instrument Cluster found dead.
4. Vehicle fuel Gauze found dead.
5. Engine completely failed to achieve ignition
6. None of the electrical parts are working
7. Found previous residue of electrical short-circuits.
8. Found low quality electrical wire kit.
9. Engine oil leakage found from Engine Head & Right round engine
10. Experienced very hard clutch
11. Experienced very hard gear shift
12. Found symptoms of gear jam.
13. Found residue of Petrol leakage on below the petrol tank.
14. Found petrol Tank inside paint corrosion due to low quality paint, this may leads to fuel valve blockage which in turn damages engine.
15. Found Petrol leakage from Carburetor.
16. Found defective engine oil cooling system.
17. Observed cranking noise from front shocks.
18. Observed knocking sound from Cone Set & T-Stem.
19. Experienced Cone Set Jam.
20. Observed Cranking sound from front wheel.
21. Found Defective Front Brake.
22. Rear Brake lags Braking Power.
23. Found Side Stand hitting centre stand.
24. Found Centre Stand rubbing chain.
25. Found Defective Rare Brake mount which is mounted on Swing arm.
26. Found Nuts missing on both the side of chassis Frames where side panel has to fit.
27. Found Rider & Pillion Seat Deformations.
28. Both Front and Rear Brake Discs found bent.
29. Observed Cranking Noise from Rear Brake.
30. Observed Cranking Noise from Rear Shocks & Swing Arm.
31. Close Fitting of Rear Brake Pad gets jam to Exhaust Guard.
32. Observed abnormalities on both the tyre.
33. Falling of Fitments parts are observed.
34. Rusting observed from almost all parts of the vehicle and they are as fallows:-

Engine, Front Shocks Holder, Cone Set, Front & Back Wheel Spokes, Front & Rear Disc Brakes, Chassis, Nuts & Bolts, Side Stand, Centre Stand, Swing Arm, Rear Monoshocks, Chain, Full Exhaust System, Head Light.”

 

 

13.   On the strength of this report it is crystal clear that, the said bike so sold by OP No.2 is defective one.  Hence, the complainant has been successful in establishing that the said bike sold by OP No.2 to the complainant was defective.

 

POINT (B) & (C):-

14.   To avoid repetition in reasonings and as these points do warrant common course of discussion, the same are taken up for consideration at a time.

 

15.   We have thoughtfully gone through the pleadings and documents of both parties, true the said bike so sold by OP No.2 has shown problems in a very short time from the date of purchase as admitted by Ops in its version as discussed in Point (A).

 

16.   At this juncture it is worth to take in to consideration the report dated: 29.03.2017 given by Srikanth.C, Mechanical Engineer, reveals the said bike is problematic and in dead condition.  Therefore serious doubts would arise on OP No.2 in not rectifying the said defects of bike nor to replace the bike.  It is duty of an authorized dealer/seller to give good conditioned vehicle and also good service to its customers.  Instead of doing so, the Ops contends as the complainant had not allowed to do service of bike and to escape from liability blaming on complainant.  This kind of unacceptable attempt of Ops make us to come to the definite conclusion that, there was total negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the Ops.

 

17.   Now there is no meaning in asking Ops to replace the said bike and to put end to an controversy and moreover the complainant has made prayer for refund of amount with interest and compensation.  Therefore we are of the definite opinion that, as per sale invoice dated: 01.06.2016, the complainant had paid a sum of Rs.1,61,734/- (one lakh sixty one thousand seven hundred thirty four only) to OP No.2 towards purchase of said bike.  Thus the total amount paid as above, the complainant is entitled to recover.

 

18.   Now, we are bound to assess the compensation with regard to the damages, problems and mental agony that the complainant suffered due to negligent act of the Ops in selling defective bike and which also includes the amount spent by complainant towards servicing of bike, fuel, etc., expenses.  So, the complainant is entitled to compensation of Rs.30,000/-.

 

19.   Now we are bound to fix the liability, indisputably OP No.2 is the dealer/seller of the said bike to complainant and sale invoice reveals that, the complainant had paid the said amount to OP No.2.  As OP No.1 is manufacturer of the same is also held liable.  Hence both OP Nos.1 & 2 are exclusively accountable to pay the compensation and refund of amount together with interest.

 

POINT (D):-

20.   We proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

01.   For foregoing reasons the complaint stands allowed with costs of Rs.5,000/- as hereunder:-

 

(a)    The complainant is held entitled to recover a total sum of Rs.1,61,734/- the cost of bike he paid and a sum of Rs.30,000/- as compensation together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint till realization exclusively from OP Nos.1 & 2 together with jointly and severally.

 

(b)    We grant 30 days time to OP Nos.1 & 2 to comply the order by taking back the said bike Royal Enfield Himalayan Bike bearing chassis No. ME3D4A5C1GE002150, Engine No. D4A5C1GE002904, temporary registration No. KA-07-TS001191 as in existing condition from the date of communication of it.

 

02.   Send a copy of this order to both parties free of costs.

 

(Dictated to the Stenographer in the Open Forum, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us on this 18^th DAY OF APRIL 2017)

 

 

 

LADY MEMBER                                          PRESIDENT