Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

212/2014

J.Dilly Babu - Complainant(s)

Versus

The General Manager, M/s.K.L.N.Autos - Opp.Party(s)

M.Kavitha

11 Nov 2016

ORDER

                                                            Complaint presented on:  30.10.2014

                                                                Order pronounced on:  11.11.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,           MEMBER II

 

FRIDAY THE 11^th  DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016

 

C.C.NO.212/2014

 

 

Mr.J.Dilly Babu, Old No.1,

New No.23, Vallalar Street,

Pasupon Nagar, Chennai – 600 075.

                                                                                        ..... Complainant

 

..Vs..

 

1. The General Manager,

M/s. K.L.N.Autos,

No.E-5, 3^rd Avenue, Anna Nagar East,

    Chennai 600 102 and Branch Office at

     L44, Ambattur Industrial Estate,

    Near Vawin Bus Stop, Chennai 600 058.

 

2. Regional Manager,

M/s. Bajaj having Registered and

Head Office at Bajaj Auto Complex,

Akurdi, Pune 411 035,

Regional Office at No.616,

2.  

Annasalai, Chennai 600 006.

	...Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                     : 31.10.2014

Counsel for Complainant                          : M.Kavitha

Counsel for Opposite Parties                    : Su. Chidambaram

 

O R D E R

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant purchased a Bajaj Discover 125 M Disc Motor Cycle from the 1^st Opposite Party/dealer and the said vehicle was delivered to him on 23.05.2014. The 2^nd Opposite Party is the Regional Office of the manufacturer’s Bajaj Discover 125 M Disc Motor Cycle. The Complainant was facing problem right from the purchase of the vehicle. The heat generating in the rear wheel drum and wheel of the vehicle. The Complainant lodged a Complaint on 03.06.2014 with the 1^st Opposite Party and the vehicle serviced on 04.06.2014 and delivered to the Complainant. Even after such service, the same problem persisted in the vehicle and again sent on 09.06.2014 to the 1^st Opposite Party and the vehicle was serviced and delivered to him on the same day. Even after two services the same problem continued and after 3^rd service on 28.06.2014 again the same problem continued till the date of this Complaint. The Complainant is not able to drive for long distance in view generation of the heat in the rear wheel drum and wheel. Hence the Complainant issued legal notice dated 09.07.2014 to the Opposite Parties. The Opposite Parties have not rectified the defects alleged by the Complainant and hence the Complainant has filed this Complaint either to refund the cost of the vehicle or replace with new vehicle and to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- for mental agony with cost of the Complaint.

2. WRITTERN VERSION OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES  IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands. The Complainant alleged the problem of heat in the rear wheel which is not fault of the Opposite Parties. The Opposite Parties changed the brake system and ball bearing of the rear wheel etc., for the good will of the company and the mechanic taken run of 50 km distance without any problem and delivered on 28.06.2014 and the Complainant has signed accepting the satisfaction and completing the services by attending all the problems. The Complainant not submitted the documents of the services details as per list of documents mentioned in the Complaint copy and also warranty book which is very essential to prove his side and also to decide the case or Complaint in the proceedings. The Opposite Parties willing to service the vehicle as per the warranty. Absolutely no deficiency committed by this Opposite Parties and prays to dismiss the Complaint with costs.

3.POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          2. Whether the complaint is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

4.POINT : 1

           The Complainant purchased a Bajaj Discover 125 M Disc Motor Cycle from the 1^st Opposite Party/dealer on payment of consideration of Rs.     51,990/- on 21.05.2014 under Ex.A1 and the said vehicle was delivered to the Complainant on 23.05.2014 and Ex.A2 is the registration certificate of the vehicle.

          5. The Complainant alleged deficiency against the Opposite Parties that the heat generated from the rear wheel drum and wheel and he is not able to drive for long distance in view of the generation of the heat and therefore he has entrusted the vehicle to the 1^st Opposite Party for three times and he also  serviced the vehicle on all three occasions and however the problem was not rectified and further he has also given  Ex.A3 to Ex.A5 letters  for the said defects to rectify the vehicle and since the Opposite Parties  have not rectified the same proves  the deficiency in service of the Opposite Parties.

          6. The Opposite Parties would contend that they have changed brake line and also rear wheel drum in the wheel and rectified the defects and the Complainant has not proved through expert evidence that the heat is generated from the rear wheel drum even after service and therefore the Complainant has not proved deficiency and the allegation are imaginary and therefore the Opposite Parties prays to dismiss the Complaint.

          7. Admittedly Ex.A3 to Ex.A5 letters for service received by the 1^st Opposite Party from the Complainant. The Opposite Party also admitted that they have done service and changed the brake lining and also changed the rear wheel drum. Since the Opposite Party themselves admits that the vehicle was repaired by them, The contention of the Opposite Party that the Complainant has not filed job cards issued to him will no way affect the case of the Complainant, as the Opposite Parties admitted changed spares.

          8. The Opposite Parties contention that no expert evidence adduced by the Complainant to prove that the vehicle rear wheel generating heat. Admittedly three times the vehicle was serviced and the wheel drum was changed only to rectify the defect of producing heat in the rear wheel.  The Complainant also did not deny the change of wheel drum by the Opposite Parties. In such circumstances apart from the evidence of the Complainant either expert evidence or any other evidence ought to have produced by the Complainant to prove that even after change of wheel drum, the rear wheel continues to produce the heat. No such evidence forthcoming on behalf of the Complainant to prove his case that the vehicle rear wheel continues to produce the heat even after service done by the Opposite Parties by changing the wheel drum. Therefore, in the circumstances we hold that the Complainant has not proved with sufficient evidence that the rear wheel of the vehicle continues to produce heat even after services done by the Opposite Parties and therefore we hold that the Opposite Parties have not committed Deficiency in Service. 

 9.POINT :2        

Since the Opposite Parties have not committed any deficiency in service, the complainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed in the complainant and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

          In the result the complaint is dismissed. No costs.

Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 11^th   day of November 2016.

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 21.05.2014                   Copy Invoice and payment voucher

 

Ex.A2 dated 23.05.2014                   Copy of Registration Certificate

 

 

 

Ex.A3 dated 04.06.2014                   Copy of first Complaint given to the 1^st Opposite                                              

                                                    Party

Ex.A4 dated 09.06.2014                   Copy of second Complaint given to the 1^st

                                                    Opposite Party

Ex.A5 dated 25.06.2014                   Copy of first Complaint given to the 1^st Opposite

                                                    Party

Ex.A6 dated 06.06.2014                   Copy of the E-mail sent from Complainant to 1^st

                                                    Opposite Party

Ex.A7 dated 09.07.2014                   Copy of the Legal Notice sent to the 1^st Opposite

                                                    Party through RPAD along with Internet tracking

                                                    Receipt

Ex.A8 dated 09.07.2014                   Copy of the Legal Notice sent to the 2^nd Opposite

                                                    Party along with acknowledge     

Ex.A9  dated 21.05.2014                  Tax Invoice

Ex.A10 dated 21.05.2014                 Debit Note

Ex.A11 dated  NIL                            Warranty Scope & Limit

Ex.A12 dated NIL                             Battery Warranty Card 

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTY:

Ex.B1 dated  NIL                    Job Sheet                                

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT