Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/140/2015

M/s.T.Suresh - Complainant(s)

Versus

The manager Honda motorcycle and Scooter India Pvt Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

T.Jayanthi

29 Aug 2016

ORDER

   Date of Filing :   23.03.2015

                                                                      Date of Order :   23.08.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI(SOUTH)

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

 

PRESENT: THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM M.A.M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

       DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

 

C.C.NO.140/2015

FRIDAY THIS  28^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016

 

Mr. T.Suresh,

S/o. Mr.Tamilarasan,

No.1, 1^st Cross Street,

LIC Colony, Pammal,

Chennai – 75.                                                     ..Complainant

 

                                         ..Vs..

 

1.  The Manager,

Honda Motorcycle and

Scooter India Pvt. Ltd.,

3^rd and 4^th Floor No.10,

GJ Complex,

First Main Road,

CIT Nagar,

Chennai – 35.

Tamil Nadu.

 

2. The Manager,

Unique Motors,

No.5/1, Chennai Main Road,

Ayyan Kovil Pattu,

Villupuram 605 602.                                        ..Opposite parties    

 

 

For the Complainant         :   M/s. J.Jayanthi.           

For the opposite party-1   :   Exparte.

For the opposite party-2   :   M/s. C.Munusamy & others      

 

 

Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.  The complaint is filed seeking direction against the 2nd opposite party  to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for hardship  and to hand over the original R.C. book and other related papers and Rs.10,000/- as excess amount to the complainant.   

ORDER

THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM PRESIDENT

1.The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:-  

 

The complainant submit that he has purchased the complaint mentioned Honda Active Scooter 125 from the 2^nd opposite party who is the authorized dealer of the 1^st opposite party, who is the manufacturer of the said vehicle, as per the invoice dated 23.10.2014 for Rs.61,675/-.   The complainant has paid a sum of Rs.71,663/- to the 2^nd opposite party on 23.10.2014.  The complainant also submit that he also purchased some extra fittings for the said vehicle from the 2^nd opposite party for Rs.2,678/- as per invoice dated 25.10.2014.    The 2^nd opposite party has collected Rs.10,000/- as excess amount from the complainant.   Accordingly when the vehicle was delivered to the complainant, there were scratches were found all over the body of the vehicle and within few days from taking delivery, the vehicle found not functioning properly with defects such as speedometer was not working, starting problem and continuous noise engine.   Then the complainant informed the same to the 2^nd opposite party and handed over the vehicle for service.    Even after attended the service by the 2^nd opposite party, the vehicle found with above said same problems and the said problems are not rectified by the 2^nd opposite party.   Further the complainant also submit that the opposite party have not furnished the original R.C. book of the said vehicle to the complainant.  Despite of the several demands, complainant’s notice,  emails and notice through his counsel the opposite parties have not complied the grievance of the complainant.   As such the act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.   As such the complainant has sought for a sum of Rs.1,00,000 as compensation and to hand over the original R.C. book and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as excess amount to the complainant.   Hence the complaint.  

2.     Even after receipt of the notice from this forum in this proceeding, the 1^st opposite party did not appear before this Forum and did not file any written version.  Hence the 1^st opposite party was set exparte on 26.5.2015.

3.     Written Version of 2^nd opposite party is   in briefly as follows:

        The 2^nd opposite party deny all the averments and allegation contained in the complaint except those that are specifically admitted herein.   The 2^nd opposite party submit that the complainant has purchased the vehicle after paying necessary charges as per the rules and regulations of the company and he was given receipts for all the payments.  The excess payment of Rs.10,000/- is payable towards insurance, vehicle registration fee, Life time road, tax extra fittings etc.  After thorough enquiry and the procedure, the complainant has paid the amount.    The 2^nd opposite party further submit that the scratchers appeared in the two wheelers is not acceptable one.   Furthermore the complainant did not come forward to receive the registration certificate and Insurance Policy, copy of the vehicle in spite of repeated reminders.   The  opposite party is ready and willing to hand over the said documents at any point of time.  The opposite party has no necessity to retain his documents.      As such there is no deficiency in service on the part of the 2^nd opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.   Complainant has filed his Proof affidavit and Ex.A1 to Ex.A9 were marked on the side of the complainant.   Proof affidavit of 2^nd opposite party filed and no document filed on the side of the 2^nd opposite party.  

5.      The points that arise for consideration are as follows:-

 

1.   Whether the opposite parties have committed any deficiency of

service as alleged in the complaint by the complainant?

 

2.   Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief sought for in the complaint against the opposite parties?  If so, to what extent?

 

6.  POINTS 1 & 2:

Perused the complaint filed by the complainant, the written version filed by the 2^nd opposite party and the proof affidavit filed by both Complainant and 2^nd opposite party, the documents Ex.A1 to A9 filed on the side of the complainant and considered the argument of the complainant.  The 2^nd opposite party neither filed written argument nor submitted oral argument despite of sufficient opportunities given and concluded as no arguments on the side of 2^nd opposite party and proceeded for passing order. 

7.     There is no dispute that the complainant has purchased the complaint mentioned Honda Active Scooter 125 from the 2^nd opposite party who is the authorized dealer of the 1^st opposite party who is the manufacturer of the said vehicle, as per the invoice dated 23.10.2014 for Rs.61,675/-.   The complainant has paid a sum of Rs.71,663/- to the 2^nd opposite party as per receipt Ex.A2, dated 23.10.2014 for the payment paid towards the said invoice.  The complainant also purchased some extra fittings for the said vehicle from the 2^nd opposite party for Rs.2,678/- as per invoice dated 25.10.2014.

8.     The complainant has raised grievance in this complaint, that the 2^nd opposite party has collected Rs.10,000/- as excess as per the receipt Ex.A2 against the actual price of the vehicle mentioned in the invoice Ex.A1.  Further the complainant has also raised grievance that when the vehicle was delivered to the complainant, there were scratches were found all over the body of the vehicle and within few days from taking delivery, the vehicle found not functioning properly with defects such as speedometer was not working, starting problem and continuous noise in engine.  Then the complainant informed the same to the 2^nd opposite party and handed over the vehicle for service, the 2^nd opposite party as per job card Ex.A5 on 08.11.2014, though the said defects are said to have been minor, the service station of the 2^nd opposite party has returned the vehicle by taking 6 days for service and delivered only on 13.11.2014.  Even after attended the service by the 2^nd opposite party, the vehicle found with above said same problems and the said problems are not rectified by the opposite party. Further raised grievance that the opposite party have not furnished the original R.C. book of the said vehicle to the complainant, without any valid reasons,  despite of several demands made by the complainant. The above said acts of the opposite parties are amounts to deficiency of service.  Despite of the complainant’s notice through emails and notice through his counsel the opposite parties have not complied the grievance of the complainant  

9.     Whereas the 1^st opposite party has remained exparte in this proceedings, whereas the 2^nd opposite party has resisted the complaint by contending that the complainant has not paid any excess amount for the vehicle, but the difference of amount mentioned in Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 i.e a sum of Rs.9958/- was charged for the registration fee and for obtaining insurance for the vehicle, as such the said amount paid by the complainant was not excess amount and not refundable as claimed by the complainant.  Further contended that the vehicle was given delivery to the complainant in good condition without any scratches at the time of taking delivery by the complainant.  Further contended that the defect  said to have been found after taking delivery of the vehicle are minor defects occurs in the course of use and the said defects were rectified by the 2^nd opposite party service station and the vehicle was delivered to the complainant.  Contrary to this the complainant’s allegation that the said defects was not rectified and again the defects are found to be continued in the vehicle is not  true and no proof for the same by the complainant is produced and further contended that the R.C of the vehicle and insurance policy are ready available with the 2^nd opposite party, despite of informed the same to the complainant and requested to collect the same,  the complainant has not come forward to receive the same as such the complaint filed by the complainant is liable to be dismissed and the complainant is not liable for any compensation. 

10.    As per the above contention made by the 2^nd opposite party,  Rs.9958/- was collected from the complainant, which is  excess to the invoice Ex.A1 is towards the charges for registration of the vehicle and  for obtaining insurance.  Though it is acceptable the non issuance of the necessary receipt for the said amount  stating the said particulars to the complainant appears to be deficiency on the part of 2^nd opposite party.  Further it is also pertinent to mention though the said particulars are mentioned in the Ex.A1 they have not been filled up properly in the said columns and the valid reason for the same also not given on the side of 2^nd opposite party.  Therefore non production of necessary receipt for the said amount is the cause for leading  for the complainant to raise such grievance.  Further the 2^nd opposite party having collected necessary charges for getting registration (R.C) and insurance, it is bound and duty of the opposite party, immediately after getting registration certificate, as well as policy certificate for the vehicle to hand over the same to the complainant.  As stated by the complainant despite of his demand made through e.mail and advocate notice the 2^nd   opposite party has not handed over the original R.C. and insurance policy to the complainant till this date.  Contrary to this the contention of the 2^nd opposite party  in their written version that the complainant has not come forward to collect the same despite of the information and request made by them is not acceptable, because there is no proof on the side of 2^nd opposite party that they have informed and requested the complainant to collect the same.  Further the complainant has stated that the registration  of the vehicle before concerned RTO office was completed on 07.11.2014 itself.  This has not been specifically denied by the opposite party.  Further the complainant has attended the 2^nd opposite party’s office for the purpose of handing over the vehicle for service on 08.11.2014 and taking delivery of the vehicle on 13.11.2014, but even in such occasion if really the R.C book and insurance policy were available with the 2^nd opposite party, there is no proper explanation on the side of the 2^nd opposite party for not handing over the same to the complainant in the said occasions.   Further it also pertinent to mention that the 2^nd opposite party not even come forward to hand over the said R.C and insurance policy to the complainant during the pendency of this proceedings either outside the forum or before this forum.   Therefore we are of the considered view that though the 2^nd opposite party is not liable to refund the said amount claimed by the complainant in the complaint, the retaining of original R.C book without handing over to the complainant is amounts to deficiency of service, which caused complainant hardship in using the vehicle in the normal course is acceptable. 

11.    However, with regard to the allegations made by the complainant that the vehicle was found scratches all over the body at the time of taking delivery and after taking delivery, the vehicle  found defects of starting trouble, speedometer not working and continuous noise in engine which are not even rectified by the 2^nd opposite party while the vehicle was given service are not acceptable as not proved by the complainant in this proceedings, since they were denied by the opposite party.  As contended by the opposite party if really there were scratches on the body of the vehicle the complainant would have raised it at that time and while taking delivery of the vehicle even the complainant would have refused to take delivery of such vehicle.  Though the job card Ex.A5 there were mentioning about the scratches found in the front portion of the vehicle as one of the complaint, since the vehicle was taken delivery few days back from the date of said job card dated 09.11.2014 and used by the complainant and the scratches would have been taken place during that period.  Further the other defects and problems mentioned in the job card such as speedometer not working, starting problem, engine sound are all found to be minor problems and they were rectified in the said service as contended by the 2^nd opposite party.  Further there is no proof or evidence on the side of complainant even after taking delivery of the said vehicle by the complainant on 13.11.2014 after service, again the said vehicle found with such problems.  Since the same is specifically denied by the opposite party it is the bound and duty of the complainant to prove the same by producing necessary proof of mechanical /  technical report. Therefore we are of the considered view that the complainant has not proved that, even after service the Ex.A3 job card mentioned defects of the vehicle are not properly attended by the 2^nd opposite party during the service and found to be continued in the vehicle.  

12.    Therefore as discussed above, we are of the considered view that the 2^nd opposite party’s act of retaining  the  original R.C book and the insurance policy of the vehicle without handing over to the complainant despite of his demands amounts to deficiency of service which caused the complainant hardship in using the vehicle in the normal course, as such, we are of the considered view that the 2^nd opposite party is to be directed to handover the original R.C of the said vehicle and also to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- as just and reasonable compensation and to pay the sum of Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.  Accordingly the points 1 and 2 are answered.

        In the result, this complaint is partly allowed.  The 2^nd opposite party is directed to handover the original Registration Certificate of the said vehicle and to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) as compensation and to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as costs to the complainant within six weeks from the date of this order, failing which the said compensation amount of Rs.15000/- will carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of this order to till the date of payment.   No order as against  the 1^st opposite party.

          Dictated to the Assistant transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this the  26^th    day  of  August   2016.

 

MEMBER-I                                          MEMBER-II                                        PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s Side documents :

Ex.A1-  23.10.2014    - Copy of Retail Invoice.

Ex.A2- 23.10.2014     - Copy of cash receipt.

Ex.A3- 25.10.2014     - Copy of accessories bill.

Ex.A4- 11.11.2014     - Copy of email sent by the complainant to the opposite party.

Ex.A5-                    -       - Copy of Minor Job card.

Ex.A6-                    -        - Copy of photos.

Ex.A7- 5.2.2015        - Copy of legal notice.

Ex.A8- 20.2.2015      - Copy of reply notice with ack. card.

Ex.A9- 20.2.2015      - Copy of invoice.

Opposite parties’ side documents: - 

 

         .. Nil ..

 

 

MEMBER-I                                          MEMBER-II                                        PRESIDENT.