CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,PALAKKAD
Dated this the 30th July, 2015
PRESENT : SMT. SHINY.P.R, PRESIDENT
: SMT. SUMA. K.P, MEMBER Date of filing : 09/05/2014
CC /67/2014
Abbas.A,
S/o.Abdul Subahan.M, : Complainant
MA Manzil,
Police Housing Colony,
Kannadi, Palakkad.
(ByAdv.Asha.M)
Vs
1. The General Manager,
Honda Motorcycles and Scooters India Pvt.Ltd : Opposite parties
Plot No.1 Sector-3,
IMT, Maneswar, District Gurgaon,
Haryana-122050
(By Adv.Girish.K.Nochulli)
2. General Manager,
Ghani Honda Motors,
Fort Maidan, Kunnathurmedu,
Palakkad-678 013
(By Adv.M.Narayanankutty)
O R D E R
By Smt. Suma. K.P, Member,
The complainant purchased a motor bike under the name and style Honda CB Unicorn (CBF 150 MA) “Black in Colour” manufactured by the 1st opposite party on 07/08/2013 for a sum of Rs.68,637/- (Rupees Sixty Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Thirty Seven only) from the 2nd opposite party. Immediately after 10 days of purchase the vehicle started showing multiple defects like engine noise, Chain Spocket, and running missing etc. Then the complainant had approached the Service Centre run by 2nd opposite party to cure the defects on 26/08/2013 being the first service date. Service Manager of the 2nd opposite party had done only oil changing and did not repair the vehicle inspite of the fact that the complainant had stated defects of the vehicle while giving it for service. Even after the service the vehicle continued to have more defects. The complainant approached the service centre on 5/11/2013 of the 2nd opposite party, by the next day service manager returned the same without rectifying the defects. Same was repeated on 30/01/2014. Subsequently the complainant approached the service centre on 5/3/2014 and requested the Manager of the 2nd opposite party to rectify the defects. But instead of rectifying the defects Manager misbehave towards the complainant.
Again on 17/03/2014 the complainant approached the Service Centre of the 2nd opposite party with same defects and asked the service manager to rectify the same defects. But it was not rectified. Finally on 24/03/2014 complainant approached the service centre with same defects, but the Service Manager of the 2nd opposite party insulted the complainant. 2nd opposite party is duty bound to see that the vehicle is free from any defects and to behave properly by explaining the complaint. The complainant had sent lawyer notice to the opposite parties on 27/03/2014. But there was no reply from the 1st opposite party. 2nd opposite party sent a reply stating false and frivolous contentions. The 2nd opposite party also lodged a false complaint before the S.I, South Station, Palakkad and the complainant was summoned to the police station. The complaint was closed reserving the right of the complainant to approach the Consumer Forum for his grievance. The complainant alleges that he had suffered heavy loss due to the deficiency of service rendered and manufacturing defects of the vehicle and suffered mental agony and had approached before this forum seeking an order directing the opposite parties to replace the vehicle or to return back the actual sale prize paid (Rs.68,637/-) along with Rs.50,000/- for the financial loss and mental agony and cost of this complaint.
The notice was issued to the opposite parties for appearance. Even if both the opposite parties entered appearance only 2nd opposite party had filed version. Second opposite party contended that there are no defects or any manufacturing defect nor any other trouble with reference to the motor bike of the complainant. Whenever this motor bike is brought to the service centre all the complaints alleged by the complainant from time to time, was examined, inspected meticulously tested by the experts and qualified service personnel and if any defects or otherwise is noticed, will be rectified immediately to the satisfaction of all clients including the complainant herein.
Though, every time the complainant has been repeatedly made complaints to the effect that there is engine noise, chain spocket and running, missing etc, it is found on examination and testing that there are no such defects as alleged and working of the engine as well as other various parts of the vehicle are in perfect condition and in order, when compared with similar other vehicles. It is only an illusory feeling or purposely making such frivolous complaints for reasons best known to him, with certain ulterior and sinister motives.
Every time when the complainant comes to the service centre he is misbehaving to the service personnel and unnecessarily becomes violent, becomes impatient and uses filthy and vulgar languages and creates a very bad atmosphere while the other customers are standing nearby. The complainant has become a menace and a permanent nuisance to the entire service personnel. The complainant has also threatened the service personnel many a time and also blackmailed them. Despite all these indecent behavior on the part of the complainant, the service personnel where tolerating him with great patience so as to maintain the good relationship with the customer and in order to maintain the good relationship with the customer and in order to maintain the reputation and status of M/s.Honda, the most leading Motor Bike manufactures and dealers in India. It is the motto of the Honda dealers to satisfy every customer because, the customer is considered to be a valuable person as far as the dealers are concerned.
Again immediately after the 4th service on 05/03/2004 after taking delivery the vehicle, the complainant came back after some time and complained that the front mudguard is damaged and there is a small dent. Though this respondent is not responsible for the same as it is clear from the conduct that, he has made any such complaint at any time while taking delivery of the vehicle from the service centre. However the 2nd opposite party in order to avoid any confrontation and unpleasant situation that part was replaced free of cost.
Again on 17/03/2014 the complainant brought the vehicle with the very same complaints as before. Accordingly a job card (No.32067) was registered noting down the complaint there in and as usual the counter foil was handed over to him, which is to be returned at the time of taking delivery of the vehicle after service. But after half an hour or 45 minutes the complainant become inpatient and restless and insisted for immediate delivery of the vehicle. The vehicle was given delivery immediately. But he refused give back the counter foil and threatened that he will teach a lesson by misusing the counter foil which was in his possession. He created a scene in the service centre shouted at the top of his voice and created a scene and forcibly took away the vehicle and after some time he phoned up the service centre and demanded for the delivery of the vehicle while he was actually in possession of the vehicle. At this juncture, the service Manager of the 2nd opposite party, filed a written complaint immediately before the S.I. of Police, Palakkad town south Police Station and the complainant was summoned by the police and when questioned he admitted that he is in possession of the vehicle. Hence he was warned by the S.I of the Police not to repeat such foul plays. All these incidents were reported to the principals M/s.Honda Motor Cycles and Scooters Pvt.Ltd, Hariyana.
Needless to mention that all these indecent and violent behavior, threatening the staff, blackmailing the staff, making false complaints and creating a horror etc. has affected adversely the morale of the service personnel and has also adversely affected the status and reputation and goodwill of the opposite parties caused substantial mental agony to the service personnel and also considerable commercial loss and damages to the business image of M/s.Honda.
As this vehicle has no defects or complaint or any manufacturing defects or any excess voice or any other problem the opposite parties are not bound to replace the vehicle or to repay the price as alleged in the complaint.
The complainant has not suffered any mental stress or agony as claimed by him and hence the opposite parties are neither liable nor responsible to pay any sum as compensation, much less the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) as claimed by the complainant.
Under these circumstances these opposite parties are not in a position to service in vehicle of the complainant any more.
The complainant filed application to summon the witness and also for amending the complaint for rectification of a clerical mistake with respect to the date of lawyer notice. Application was allowed and amendment was carried out. Complainant filed chief affidavit along with documents. Opposite party filed application seeking permission to cross examine the complainant. Complainant was cross examined as PW1 and Ext.A1-A8 was marked. 2nd opposite party has not filed affidavit. Evidence was closed. The matter was heard.
The following issues are to be considered.
- Whether there is any manufacturing defect to the vehicle as alleged?
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
- If so, what are the reliefs and cost?
At the time of cross examination of the complainant had deposed that the vehicle has run more than 19,000 k.m. The admitted case of the opposite party is that the vehicle is not having any manufacturing defects or any other defects. The complainant has not taken any steps to get the vehicle examine by an expert or any other qualified motor vehicle inspector and get a report or certificate regarding the defects of the vehicles if any. Though the Manager of M/s.A.M.Wings was cited as a witness and witness list was also filed, he was not examined before the Forum inspite of his presence. Ext.A8 bill issued by A.M.Wings for Rs.733/- on 18/04/2014 will not show that the vehicle had any manufacturing defects or any other defects. During cross examination also the complainant has stated that വണ്ടിക്ക് manufacturing defect ഉണ്ടോ എന്ന് എനിക്ക് പറയാൻ പറ്റില്ല. In short, the complainant has not adduced any expert evidence or any other reliable or dependable evidence to prove that the vehicle had any defects alleged by him. In view of the above circumstances the complaint is dismissed without costs.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 30th day of July, 2015.
Sd/-
Smt. Shiny.P.R
President
Sd/- Smt. Suma. K.P
Member
A P P E N D I X
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 – Tax Invoice Dtd.07/08/2013 of Rs.68,637/- (Original)
Ext.A2 – Warranty Registration Card Dtd.07/08/2013 (Original)
Ext.A3 – Service Record sheet Original
Ext.A4 - Lawyer notice dtd.27/03/2014 sent by the complainant to the opposite parties (Photocopy)
Ext.A5 - A/D. Card to the complainant
Ext.A6 - Reply notice dtd.04/04/2014 sent by Adv.M.Narayanankutty
Ext.A7- Certified copy of complaint dtd.17/03/2014 sent by the 2nd OP to South Station, Palakkad in the name of the complainant.
Ext.A8- Service Bill of A.M.Wings Two Wheelers (P) LTD dtd.18/04/2014
Witness marked on the side of complainant
PW1- Abbas.A
Exhibits marked on the side of opposite party
Nil
Witness examined on the side of opposite parties
Nil
Cost Allowed
No cost allowed.
