IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  COMMISSION, ALAPPUZHA.

Wednesday the 2^nd  of March, 2022.

Filed on 01.03.2019

Present

1. Sri.S.Santhosh Kumar (President).

2. Smt.Sholy P.R.(Member)

In

CC/No.60/2019

Between

Complainant:-                                                               Opposite Parties:-

Sri.Anil.A                                                  1.     The Managing Director

3/546(1/655)                                                     Toyota Kirloskar Motor Ltd

Hari Nivas            ,                                            Plot No. 1 Didadi Industrial Area

Kavunkal, Ponnad.P.O                                       Bidadi.P.O, Ramanagara District

Mannanchery Panchayath                                   Karnataka-562109

Alappuzha-688538                                                    (Adv.K .M. Somakumar)                                                              (Adv. Jose.Y.James)                                  2.      The Managing Director 

    Nippon Motor Corporation Pvt. Ltd

                                                                            Keerikkadu.P.o,Kayamkulam

                                                                           Alappuzha-690508

              (M/s.P. Viswanathan Associates)

O R D E R

SRI. S.SANTHOSH KUMAR (PRESIDENT)

Complaint filed under Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

1.       Material averments briefly discussed are as follows: -

Attracted by the advertisements of the opposite parties who are the manufacturer and sales cum service centre of Toyota Vehicles complainant purchased a Toyota Etios Diesel vehicle and on 11.04.16 took delivery from the 2^nd opposite party at Kayamkulam.  The car was purchased for using as a taxi for his livelihood.  The vehicle was registered as KL-04-AJ 1926.  Complainant promptly serviced his vehicle at 2^nd opposite party’s service station at Alappuzha as per periodical service intervals stipulated in the vehicle hand book.  From 10,000 Kms onwards the vehicle showed sudden drop in engine oil level and complainant duly intimated and lodged complaint to 2^nd opposite party showroom and in reply they assured that it is normal in new engine and that the oil consumption will be more.  It was assured that it will be decreased when the engine become older.   However when complainant started checking engine oil level it was noticed that it is dropping day by day.  2^nd opposite party assured complainant that his complaint was duly registered with the 1^st opposite party for replacing / rectifying damaged parts under warranty.  But nothing materialized.  Again on 20,000 Km service and 30,000 Km service complaint of excess oil consumption was registered but there was no action.

2.       Complainant approached the opposite parties personally, telephonically and via e-mail to rectify the defect.  At last 2^nd opposite party on 50,000 Km service the vacuum pump was replaced under warranty.   But after the replacement of vacuum pump also excess engine oil consumption still persisted. 

3.       Complainant believed that the vehicle delivered to him is a defective one and the persisting  mechanical problem of the vehicle is due to the manufacturing defect of engine.  The repeated complaints within the warranty period would clearly show that the vehicle supplied to the complainant is having manufacturing defect.  Several customers of Toyota etios diesel model vehicle are facing same engine oil dropping problem.  The act of the opposite parties amounts to unfair trade practice and the complainant suffered heavy loss due to their acts.  Opposite parties are severally and jointly liable to compensate  the complainant.  Hence the complaint is filed for giving a direction to the opposite parties to replace the vehicle or in the alternative to refund the present market value along with interest and pay compensation of Rs.1 lakh.

4.       1^st opposite party filed a version mainly contenting as follows:-

The relationship between this opposite party and 2^nd opposite party is on principal to principal basis.  Dealers purchased vehicles and parts from this opposite party on payment of full price and in turn they sell the same to their customers. Issue relating to booking, delivery, cancellation, servicing, customer relationship etc. are independently handled by dealers.  Hence this opposite party is not liable for the acts or omissions of 2^nd opposite party.

5.       As per clause 4 (2) of the owner’s manual and warranty book etios model vehicles requires engine oil replacement at every 5000 KM if it is used as a taxi.  Complainant has not followed any of the said guidelines.  Complainant has not carried out the engine oil replacement as prescribed during the periodical services.  This opposite party was never contacted by the complainant for concern of engine oil drop or for that matter any concerned regarding the vehicle owned by the complainant.  The complainant raised his concern of engine oil drop when he handed over the vehicle for service at 30000 Kms.  He was made to understand the usage of the vehicle and handed over the vehicle after the service.  Even during the PSFU called perform after service complainant informed his satisfaction.

6.       On 04-12-17 complainant again brought the said vehicle to the 2^nd opposite party with the concern of engine oil drop.  It was found that there was no such issues and carried out a top up of the engine oil.  The complainant was requested to produce the vehicle if there is any issue.  However it was produced for 40000 Kms  service only on 45604 Kms.  Complainant had promptly evaded the periodical services. The averment that the vacuum pump was replaced since there is a manufacturing defect is absolutely false.   The vacuum pump was replaced by the 2^nd opposite party under warranty to reassure the complainant that the opposite parties were always willing to ensure that the complainant was satisfied and to show that there was indeed no manufacturing defect in the vehicle.  The engine oil drop was shown since there was no periodical service.  There was no manufacturing defect for the vehicle and the complaints occurred due to the usage of the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner.  There is no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice.  The vehicle was purchased about 3 years back and so there is no question of replacing the same.  Complainant has not suffered any loss and so he is not entitled for any compensation.  Hence the complaint may be dismissed with cost.

7.       2^nd opposite party filed a version mainly contenting as follows:-

Complainant purchased the vehicle from this opposite party on 11.04.16 and is being used as a taxi.   Complainant had not carried out the periodical service of the vehicle  as stipulated in the owner’s manual as on date.  The allegation that from 10000 Kms onwards the vehicle showed sudden drop in engine oil level and it was duly intimated to this opposite party is false.   Even when the vehicle was produced for periodical service of 30000 KM at 30249 Kms on 29.08.17 there was no such complaint.  Only when this opposite party contacted for feedback he raised a suspicion regarding consumption of engine oil and he was requested to produce the vehicle.  But it was not done and he produced the vehicle only at 38404 Km when it was due for the next periodical service.  On inspection there was no sudden drop or any drastic variation in the engine oil consumption. 

8.       When the vehicle was brought to the service station the complainant requested to replace the vacuum pump with modified vacuum pump and it was done.  It will reduce the engine oil consumption by 12 to 13%.   Even according to the owner’s manual, extensive idling, low speed driving for a long distance such as taxi or door to door delivery use the engine oil consumption will varie from that in other vehicles.  There was no engine oil dropping issue for other customers as stated in the complaint.  There was no unfair trade practice and deficiency of service as alleged in the complaint.  Complainant has not sustained any monitory loss and the complaint may be dismissed with cost.   

9.       On the above pleadings following points were raised for consideration:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service or unfair trade practice from the part of opposite parties as alleged in the complaint?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get an order to exchange his vehicle bearing registration No.KL 04 AJ 1926 with a defect free one as prayed for? In the alternative whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of present market value along with interest?
3. Whether the complainant is entitled to realise an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation?
4. Reliefs and cost?

10.     Evidence in this case consists of the oral evidence of PW1 to PW5 and Exts.A1 to A35 series and MO1 from the side of the complainant and the oral evidence of RW1 from the side of opposite parties.  The commission report was marked as Ext.C1 and owner’s manual is marked as Ext.C1 (a).

PW1 is the complainant in this case. He filed an affidavit in tune with the complaint and marked Ext. A1 to A32 and MO1.

In the result complaint is allowed in part.

1. Opposite parties are directed to top up the engine oil at every 5000 KMs to the vehicle of complainant bearing registration No.KL 04 AJ 1926 up to 200000 KMs.    
2.  Opposite parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.25,000/- as compensation to the complainant.  
3. Complainant is allowed to realise an amount of Rs.4,000/- as cost from the opposite parties.

MO1 will be returned to PW1 after appeal  period

The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Commission on this the 02^nd day of March, 2022.

Sd/-Sri.S.Santhosh Kumar (President)

Sd/-Smt.C.K Lekhamma (Member)

Appendix:-Evidence of the complainant:-

PW1                    -         Anil.A  (Complainant)

PW2                    -        Anshad.B(witness)

PW3                    -        Lijo Joy (Witness)

PW4                    -        Jospeh.K.C(Witness)

PW5                    -        Jayachandran (AMVI)  

Ext.A1                -        True copy of RC Book

Ext.A2                -         True copy of Driving Licence

Ext.A3                -        True copy of permit

Ext.A4                -        True copy of policy.

Ext. A5               -        True copy of Job Card dtd. 31/3/2016.

Ext.A6                -        True copy of Job card dtd. 12/4/2016

Ext.A7                   -         Original Job Card dtd. 17/5/2016

Ext.A8                  -         True copy of Job card along with bills dtd. 21/10/2016

Ext.A9                  -          True copy of  Job Card dtd. 10/11/2016

Ext.A10             -         True copy of job card  along with bills dtd. 23/2/2017

Ext.A11             -         True copy of job card along with bills dtd. 29/8/2017

Ext.A12             -         True copy of bills dtd. 28/9/2017

Ext.A13             -         True copy of job card along with bills dtd. 4/12/2017

Ext.A14             -         True copy of job card along with bills dtd. 17/3/2018

Ext.A15             -         True copy Job card along with bills dtd. 23/3/2018

Ext.A16             -         Original  job card along with bills dtd. 23/5/2018

Ext.A17             -         True copy of job card along with bills dtd.29/5/2018

Ext.A18             -         Original bill dtd. 23/6/2018

Ext.A19             -         True copy of job card dtd. 5/5/2019

Ext.A20             -         True copy of bills dtd. 9/5/2019

 Ext.A21             -        True copy of job card along with bills dtd. 19/10/2019

 Ext.A22            -         True Copy  of job card along with original bills .

Ext.A23              -        True copy of job card dtd. 6/11/2019

Ext.A24             -         Original bills dtd. 7/11/2019

Ext.A25              -        True copy of job card dtd. 28/11/2019

Ext.A26             -         True copy of job card along with bills dtd. 29/11/2019

Ext.A27             -         Original Job card dtd. Along with bills dtd.26/10/2020

Ext.A26             -         Original bill dtd. 22/7/2021

Ext.A27             -         Original job card dtd. Along with bills 26/10/2020

Ext.A28             -         Original Bill dtd. 22/7/2021.

Ext.A29             -         True copy of  dtd. 5/8/2021 along with service bills.

Ext.A30             -         True copy of 2 warranty extension cards issued by the 2^nd

Ext.A31(S.o)      -           Photograph

Ext.A32 (S.O)    -         True copy of new

Ext.A33 series   -         RC Book particulars

Ext.A34series    -         copy of RC

Ext.A35             -         True copy of RC particulars

Ext.C1                -         Commission Report.

Ext.C1(a)           -         Photographs                 

MO 1                  -         CD

Evidence of the opposite parties:-           

RW1                     -        Vidhu.C.V(Witness)

///True Copy ///

To     

          Complainant/Oppo. party/S.F.

                                                                                                     By Order

                                                                                                 Assistant Registrar

Typed by:- Sa/-

Comp.by: