Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/131/2018

Parvinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Managing Director, Royal Enfield - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

16 Aug 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II,   U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint  No	:	131 of 2018
Date  of  Institution	:	28.02.2018
Date   of   Decision	:	16.08.2018

 

 

 

 

Parvinder Singh s/o Late Satish Kumar, r/o House No.1042, Sector 52, Chandigarh.     

             …..Complainants

Versus

1]  The Managing Director, Royal Enfield, Tiruvottiyur High Road, Tiruvottiyur, Chennai 600 019

2]  The Managing Director, Manmohan Auto Store, SCF-6, Sector 27-C, Chandigarh.

3]  The Managing Director, Garg Autos, Plot No.18, Phase-1, Industrial Area, Chandigarh.

                          ….. Opposite Parties

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN            PRESIDENT

         SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA        MEMBER

                                SH.RAVINDER SINGH         MEMBER 

 

Argued by: Complainant in person.

 Sh.Polly Shera, Adv. for OPs.

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

 

         Briefly the case of the complainant is that he purchased Royal Enfield Standard UCE Motor Cycle from OP No.2 for an amount of Rs.1,13,069/- on 21.3.2017 (Ann.C-1). It is stated that the motorcycle in question is having manufacturing defect and therefore, he has to approach the Opposite Party No.3 a number of times.  It is submitted that the complainant handed over his motorcycle to Opposite Party NO.3 for repairs on 5.4.2017, 26.4.2017 and 3.5.2017 and all the times, it was returned after 2/3 days, but still failed to rectify the manufacturing defect in the vehicle (Ann.C-2 to C-4).  It is also submitted that the complainant also approached Opposite Party No.2 about 7 times and Opposite Party No.2 also replaced the defective parts of the motorcycle i.e. Rim-2 times, Fuel Tank, Meter Cap, Fuel Pipe, Clutch Assembly, Complete Kit with Clutch Assembly, Handle Clip, but despite that the OPs have failed to rectify the manufacturing defect in the motor cycle.  It is pleaded that the complainant requested the OPs to replace the motorcycle in question with new one as it is suffering from manufacturing defect, but they did not pay any heed. The complainant also sent a legal notice to the OPs, but to no avail.  Hence, this complaint has been filed.

 

2]      The OPs have filed joint reply and while admitting the sale and repair of the vehicle, stated that vehicle in question is not suffering from any manufacturing defect, as alleged.  It is stated that the complainant failed to disclose the specific manufacturing defect in the vehicle nor lead any evidence to prove the same.  It is submitted that the complainant listed some minor problems like handle being little loose, checking of average, loose clutch while visiting Opposite Party NO.3 during first service on 26.4.2017.  It is also submitted that similarly on 3.5.2017 minor problem like the clutch being hard, average, starting problems, missing problem, reserve function not working properly were listed by the complainant. It is further submitted that these issues were minor in nature faced by the complainant while running the motor cycle which required some adjustments only and there was nothing wrong with the motor cycle, as such.  It is pleaded that the complainant visited the OP No.2 workshop on 3.11.2017 with accidental damage to his vehicle and as a goodwill gesture replaced the motorcycle rims, which were damaged by the complainant while riding the motorcycle off & over ruff road, non-motor-able dirt & rocky terrain and also met with an accident thereby damaging the rims of the motorcycle, which were not covered under warranty.  It is also pleaded that similarly, the fuel tank was replaced as it had a dents due to an external force/collision, the meter cap, fuel pipe, handle clips and clutch lever etc. were all replaced as the same had been damaged in the accident.  It is stated that the Opposite Parties just to satisfy the complainant changed/replaced the whole clutch assembly with new one and the vehicle was delivered to him in perfect running condition.  It is also stated that the complainant has been sold a brand new, completely roadworthy motor cycle.  Denying all other allegations and pleading no deficiency in service, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

 

3]       Rejoinder has also been filed by the complainant thereby reiterating the assertions as made in the complaint and controverting that of the OPs made in their reply.

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the complainant and perused the entire record.

 

6]       It is proved on record that the complainant purchased Royal Enfield Standard UCE Motor Cycle from OP No.2 for an amount of Rs.1,13,069/- on 21.3.2017 (Ann.C-1).  It is alleged by the complainant that since the date of purchase, he could not enjoy the trouble free ride of the motorcycle in question as it remained under repairs with the OPs on several occasions. The complainant alleged in the complaint that the Opposite Parties despite repairing the vehicle in question on numerous occasions, failed to diagnosed/detect the defect in the motorcycle in question. The complainant also alleged that the Opposite Parties have changed the Rim, Fuel Tank, Meter Cap, Fuel Pipe, Clutch Assembly, Complete Kit with Clutch Assembly, Handle Clip of the motorcycle in question, but despite that the OPs have failed to rectify the defect in the motorcycle.  The complainant further alleged that the motorcycle in question is having manufacturing defect and is lying idle in the premises of the complainant as it is not roadworthy.    

 

7]       The Opposite Parties in their turn claimed that they provided all due services to the complainant. It is claimed that the complainant visited the OP No.2 workshop on 3.11.2017 with accidental damage to his vehicle and as a goodwill gesture, they replaced the motorcycle rims, damaged in an accident, changed the fuel tank having dents due to an external force/collision and also changed the meter cap, fuel pipe, handle clips and clutch lever etc. damaged in the accident.  It is contended that the Opposite Parties just to satisfy the complainant changed/replaced the whole clutch assembly with new one and delivered the vehicle to him in perfect running condition.  It is also contended that the complainant fail to specify any manufacturing defect in the motorcycle in question nor proved the same by any documentary evidence.

 

8]       Considering the arguments and thorough perusal of the record, we are of the concerted view that OPs be given an opportunity to check the vehicle thoroughly and make necessary repairs with regard to any defect therein by replacing necessary parts, free of charge, making it perfectly roadworthy. As the complainant has failed to establish any manufacturing defect in the motorcycle in question by leading an expert opinion or expert documentary evidence to that effect, therefore, it cannot be held that the motorcycle in question is suffering from any manufacturing defect, as alleged.

 

9]       However, the Job Cards placed on record by the complainant corroborates the factum that the vehicle since the date of its purchase remained under repairs on numerous occasions and certain parts of the vehicle were also changed/replaced, which establish that the complainant could not enjoy the trouble-free ride of the vehicle in question even after spending handsome amount on the purchase of brand new motorcycle and thus, certainly suffered mental agony, physical harassment.

 

10]      The Opposite Party No.3/Service Centre has miserably failed to provide after sale service to the entire satisfaction of the complainant.  The vehicle is not in a proper roadworthy conditions due to several issues as presented out by the complainant in his pleadings and arguments before this Forum.   

 

11]      Taking into consideration the entire facts & circumstances of the case, we deem it proper to direct the Opposite Parties to check the problems thoroughly persisting in the vehicle and carry out necessary repairs or replace the necessary parts, free of cost, to remove the defect in the motorcycle. Apart from it, we also deem it proper to grant a reasonable amount of compensation to the complainant taking in view the mental agony & harassment suffered by him for not enjoying the trouble free ride of the newly purchased vehicle for which he spent a handsome amount. Due to the deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has also been thrusted with unwarranted litigation. Keeping in view the natural justice, it seems to be appropriate to extend One Year warranty of the motorcycle in question till 31^st August, 2019.    

 

12]      From the above observations, we are of the opinion that the deficiency in service on the part of the OPs is proved, as a result the complainant has suffered a lot, thus, entitled to be adequately compensated. Therefore, the present complaint of the Complainant is allowed against OPs. The OPs are jointly and severally directed to thoroughly check the motorcycle in question and carry out necessary repairs, after replacing the parts, if required, free of cost, making it perfectly roadworthy treating the vehicle within warranty. The Opposite Parties are also directed to pay a reasonable amount of compensation, which we quantify to the tune of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant on account of harassment and mental agony suffered by him due to deficient act of Opposite Parties as well as towards depreciation of the value of vehicle due to frequent repairs, apart from paying litigation cost of Rs.7,000/-.  The warranty of the motorcycle in question also stands extended for one year i.e. till 31.08.2019. 

         The above said order shall be complied within 30 days of its receipt by the Opposite Parties; thereafter, they shall also be liable to pay additional compensatory cost of Rs.10,000/- besides the above relief.  

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

13^th August, 2018                                               

                                                                                                Sd/-

                                                                   (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER