Date of filing : 28-10-2011
Date of order : 28-09-2012
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC. 284/2011
Dated this, the 28th day of September 2012
PRESENT
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER
SMT.K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
Aboobacker Siddique, } Complainant
S/o.K.B.Abdulla, R/at Mundaka House,
Mogral Puthur.Po. Kasaragod.Dt.
(Adv.George John Plamoottil, Kasaragod)
The Manager, Pace Motors, } Opposite party
Thalipadpu, Kasaragod.Po. 671121.
(Adv.Madhavan Malankad, Kasaragod)
O R D E R
SMT.K.G.BEENA, MEMBER
The gist of the complaint is that the complainant purchased a Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KL-14/J 5660 on 29-07-2010 from opposite party. Due to some unusual sound and vibration from engine complainant entrusted the vehicle with opposite party on 10-08-2011. Opposite party agreed to return back the vehicle on or before 17-08-2011 after repair, but was failed to do so. Opposite party unnecessarily kept the vehicle more than 100 days in their yard. So the complainant is alleging deficiency in service on their part.
2. According to opposite party, there was delay in supply of parts for replacement from the manufacturer and hence the vehicle could not be delivered immediately.
3. Complainant filed proof affidavit in support of his case. Exts A1 to A5 marked. Complainant was cross-examined by the counsel of opposite party. Exts B1 & B2 marked on the side of opposite party, both sides heard and evidence on record perused carefully.
4. Here the complainant purchased a motor cycle from opposite party on 29-07-2010. After few days complainant noticed unusual sound and vibration from the engine of the motor cycle. So the complainant entrusted the vehicle to opposite party for repair. As per Ext.A2 opposite party received the vehicle for repair and offered to deliver it on 17-08-2011. But opposite party failed to deliver the vehicle on 17-08-2011. So the complainant sent a lawyer notice Ext.A3 demanding the return of the vehicle after repair within 7 days; which opposite party sent Ext.A5 reply informing non-availability of the parts causing delay. The documents produced by the opposite party i.e. Exts B1 & B2 shows that the vehicle was delivered to the complainant after repair is on 24-11-2011, only after filing this complaint opposite party delivered the vehicle to the complainant. Opposite party in their version states that the delay occurred due to non-availability of spare parts but nothing is produced before the Forum to prove the same. Ext.A3 proves that the allegation of the complainant is true. Peoples purchasing vehicle for their conveying facility and nobody likes to give new vehicle for repair for a long time. Such long delay in delivery of vehicle after repair might have caused mental agony to the complainant. Opposite party is liable to compensate loss and agony.
Hence complaint is allowed and opposite party is directed to compensation of `3000/- to the complainant with cost of `2000/- within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Failing which necessary steps will be taken considering the request of the complaint.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1.Photocopy of RC KL-14-J-5660
A2.Job Card. No. 1462
A3. 24-09-2011. Copy of lawyer notice.
A4. Postal acknowledgement card
A5. 20-10-2011 reply notice.
B1&B2.. 24-11-2011 Satisfaction Voucher.
PW1. Aboobacker Sidique.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pj/
