Orissa

Debagarh

CC/28/2019

Rasme Mukhi, age 20 years, D/O-Rajkumar Mukhi - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Proprietor, Jindal Motors, - Opp.Party(s)

23 Sep 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, DEOGARH

C.C NO-28/2019

Present-  Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Smt. Jayanti Pradhan, Member (W) and Smt. Arati Das, Member.

 

Rasme  Mukhi, age 20 years,

D/O-Rajkumar Mukhi,

At-Hatisal Sahi, P.O-Purunagarh,

P.S/Dist-Deogarh.                                                                                      ...    Complainant.

                                                         Vrs.

           1.    The Proprietor,

                  Jindal Motors, College Road, Deogarh,

       P.O/P.S/Dist-Deogarh-768108.

2.    The Manufacturer,

                    HERO MOTOCORP LTD,

                    34,Community Centre, Basant Lok,

                    Vasant Vihar, New Delhi,-110057

 

Counsel for the parties :

       For the Complainant :               Nemo.

       For the Opposite Parties :           None.

 

DATE OF HEARING :20.09.2019, DATE OF ORDER : 23.09.2019

SRI DIPAK KUMAR MAHAPATRA,PRESIDENT:- Brief facts of the case is that, the Complainant is a bonafide consumer who on dtd.02.04.2019 has purchased a new HERO MAESTRO EDGE(ZX) Scooty from the O.P-1 which is financed by HERO FINCORP LTD . It is insured for five years up to 2024. As on dtd. 06.05.2019 the said Scooty of the Complainant did not start in spite of all effort, she took it to the service centre of the O.P-1 where the service personnel told the problem is due to very low fuel level and suggested to refill. But it did not start after refilling up fuel. Then the O.P-1 suspected the malfunction of battery and put the same on charge. The O.P-1 removed the original battery from the Scooty and fitted an old battery from other Scooty. Thereafter on dtd. 10.05.2019 the foot rest of the said Scooty automatically broken and detached from the main body. As the Scooty is within the manufacturer warranty, the father of the Complainant requested the O.P-1 but he (O.P-1) he demanded Rs.900/- for replacement of a new foot rest and denied to cover warranty on the same. Again on dtd 12.05.2019 the Complainant found that the fuel meter is defective. On asking the O.P-1 he removed the defective fuel meter and fixed an old fuel meter from other Scooty. Due to continuous defects in the said Scooty the Complainant has lost her reliance on it and as the Scooty is in manufacturer warranty period she claimed the O.P1 to replace the same with a brand new defect free HERO MASTRO EDGE (ZX) but the O.P-1 did not bother to provide any kind of service to the Complainant.

 

POINTS OF DETERMINATION:-

1. Whether the Complainant is comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act.1986?
2. Whether the O.Ps has committed any Deficiency in Service to the Complainant?

From the above discussion and materials available on records we inferred that the Complainant is a Consumer as she has purchased a HERO MASTRO EDGE(ZX) Scooty from the O.P-1. Whenever she faced problems in riding the Scooty due to several defects, she made complain to the dealer whose work is to repair or replace the Scooty free of cost as the same is within warranty period. The service manual/book of the Company read as “If a defect is observed in any of the motorcycle,/Hero Moto corps only, obligation liability is to repair or replace those parts/parts which is/are considered to be the cause of malfunction free of charge of both labour and materials”. But the Dealer has ignored the guidelines for service and harassed the Complainant time to time which put him to unnecessary hardship. The O.P-2 has no role in this case “As a vehicle manufacturer cannot be held liable for deficient service rendered by its authorized dealer considering the basis of 'principal-to-principal' transaction between the dealer and the buyer”. Hence the O.P-2 is made free from the above allegation. Here O.P-1 has failed to remove the defects of the Complainant after several visits. So the responsibility of O.P-1 for proper service without negligence is expected is genuine. Again as the defects are repairable, it is not justified to deliver a brand new Scooty to the Complainant. Here it is clear that to avoid the burden of responsibility the O.P-1 has neglected the complainant, hence Deficiency in Service U/S-2(1)(g)  has been observed on the part of the O.P-1 and he is liable to pay compensation as under:-

 

ORDER.

The Complaint petition is allowed. The O.P is directed to replace the battery and repair the fuel meter and foot rest of the said HERO MASTRO EDGE(ZX) Scooty and remove all the alleged defects by the Complainant free of cost, to make the Scooty roadworthy. Further the O.P-1  is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand )only  as compensation, Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand ) for mental agony of the petitioner and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand ) as litigation expenses. All the above direction are to be complied within 30 (Thirty) days from receipt of this order, failing which, the Complainant is at liberty to proceed in due process of law.   

Order pronounced in the open court today i.e, on 23^rd day of September-2019 under my hand and seal of this Forum.

Office is directed to supply copies of the Order to the parties free of costs receiving acknowledgement of the delivery thereof.

                                                                    I agree,                 I agree,  

 

MEMBER.(W)              MEMBER                 PRESIDENT

 

               Dictated and Corrected

                  by me.

 

                   PRESIDENT