DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
Dated this 22th the December day of 2022
Present : Sri.Vinay Menon V., President
: Smt.Vidya A., Member
: Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member
Date of Filing: 31.05.2021 CC/90/2021
Sayooj,
S/O Mani,
Panadarakkavu House,
Elappully, P. O.,
Palakkad – 678 622 - Complainant
(Party in person)
Vs
1. The Manager,
Ghani Honda,
Fort Maidan,
Kunnathurmedu,
Palakkad -678 013
2. The Manager,
Ghani Motors,
NH 47, Karinkarapulli,
Kadamkode, Palakkad.
(Opposite party 1&2 by Adv. P. K. Dileep)
3. The Manager,
Honda Motorcycle &Scooter India Pvt. Ltd.,
Commercial Complex,
Sector 49-50,
Golf Course Extension Road, Gurugram,
Haryana – 122 018
(Ex-parte) - Opposite parties
O R D E R
By Sri.Krishnankutty, N.K, Member
1. The Complainant purchased a brand new SHINE BS6 DIS motor cycle manufactured by the third opposite party from the first opposite party dealer for Rs. 97000/- on 02/09/2020. His allegation is that the vehicle started giving complaints within one month of purchase such as gear problems, noise from gear box,, oil leakage etc. Inspite of taking the vehicle to the second opposite party, the problems persisted. According to him, this is due to manufacturing defect of the vehicle and hence approached this Commission seeking orders for replacement of the vehicle and a total compensation of Rs.60000/- for mental agony and loss of job etc. and Rs.9000/- towards cost.
2. Notices were issued to the opposite parties. First and second opposite parties entered appearance and filed their joint version. According to them they have given proper and timely service to the complainant's vehicle whenever it was taken to them with any complaint and at each time, the vehicle was delivered to him after proper checking. The third opposite party didn't enter appearance and hence was set ex-parte.
3. Issues involved.
a. Whether the complainant's vehicle is suffering from any
manufacturing defect?
b. Whether the opposite parties are liable for Deficiency in service
or unfair trade practice?
c. Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs claimed?
d. Reliefs &cost.
4. The complainant hasn't filed proof affidavit or marked any document as evidence. Further, the complainant was continuously absent for the proceedings. Hence the complaint was taken for orders based on merit.
5. Issues a, b, c, & d
In the absence proof affidavit and documentary evidence, this Commission is not in a position to make any meritorious evaluation of the issues involved, viz. manufacturing defect of the vehicle and deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.
The complainant is not entitled to any reliefs claimed. Therefore this complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 22nd day of December, 2022.
Sd/-
Vinay Menon V
President
Sd/-
Vidya A
Member
Sd/-
Krishnankutty N.K.
Member
APPENDIX
Documents marked from the side of the Complainant - Nil
Documents marked from the side of Opposite party – Nil
Witness examined - Nil
Cost - Nil
NB: Parties are directed to take back all extra set of documents submitted in the proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5) of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 failing which they be weeded out.
