DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JHARSUGUDA
CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 84 OF 2015
Anil Kumar Sethy, ( 26 Yrs.),
S/O: Ratnakar Sethy,
R/O: C/o- Dinkar Singh, Thakur Pada, Buromal,
PO/PS/ Dist: Jharsuguda,Odisha……………….…………………Complainant.
Versus
- The Proprietor of M/s Jai Hanuman Automobiles,
At: Main Road Gandhi Chowk,
PO/ PS: Brajrajnagar,
Dist: Jharsuguda, Odisha.
- Bajaj Auto Limited, Near Ganapati Mandir,
Mumbai Pune Highway Main Road,
Akrudi, Pune- 411 035. ………………..................….…...Opp. Parties.
Counsel for the Parties:-
For the Complainant Shri A.K Sharma, Adv.
For the Opp. Party No. 1 Shri A.K. Goel, Adv. & Associates.
For the Opp. Party No.2 None (Ex-parte).
Date of Order: 13.07.2016
Present
1. Shri S.L.Behera, President.
2. Shri S.K. Ojha, Member.
Shri S. L. Behera, President : - The complainant case in brief is that he has purchased one two wheeler bike Discover 100M-disc on 30.05.2015 from the O.P.No.1 by paying Rs.51,364/- only which has one year of warranty/ guarantee period. The O.P.No.1 assured to replace the vehicle is any trouble found and will not be repaired up to satisfaction. After using the vehicle it started showing trouble in engine and it was making loud or noise. The complainant went to the O.P.No.1 to short out the problem but the problem was not solved thoroughly. The complainant went several times but the problem was not solved properly which seems to be inherent defects in the vehicle since the date of purchase. The O.Ps. Making deaf ear on the said matter, hence this case.
On receiving notices the O.P.No.1 filed written version but the O.P.No.2 fails to either appear or filing written version even after providing sufficient opportunities and as such stand ex-parte. The O.P.No.1 submitted that the vehicle was purchased on 30.05.2015 and on 14.08.2015 the reading of vehicle was 2532Kms. which continuous and extensive use of vehicle. Upto the first free servicing on dtd. 07.07.2015 the vehicle ran 750Kms. and up to that no any problem is there. It is necessary to note that there are 4 /5 scheduled services and the complainant has availed only the two services and he is completely silent about the services and reading of the vehicle and denying all allegation made by the complainant with prayed for dismissal of case.
Heard the matter from both the parties and gone through the materials available on record. The complainant purchased one two wheeler bike Discover 100M-disc on 30.05.2015 from the O.P.No.1 by paying Rs.51,364/- only which has one year of warranty/ guarantee period. After using the vehicle it started showing trouble in engine and it was making loud or noise. Till the date of first free servicing of vehicle i.e. on dtd. 07.07.2015 the reading of vehicle was 750Kms. but just after one month i.e. on the date of second free servicing dtd.14.08.2015 the meter was showing 2532Kms. As per the case record the complainant could not availed the other free services provided by the O.Ps which reveals the care taken by the complainant towards his vehicle. On allegation of having inherent defect in the vehicle the complainant fails to produce any such expert opinion of the vehicle. No manufacturing defects can be presume in absence of expert evidence.
However, the vehicle is under warranty period the vehicle should be repaired by the O.Ps. and on the above limelight we are in considered opinion to allow partly of the complaint case with following directions;
ORDER
The O.P.No.1 is hereby directed to repair the vehicle of the complainant bearing Regn. No.OD-23C-2076 by removing the defects from the vehicle, without taking any repair charges including cost of spare parts within 15 (fifteen) days from the date of receipt of this order.
Accordingly the case is disposed of.
Order pronounced in the open court today the 13th day of July’ 2016 and copy of this order shall be supplied to the parties as per rule.
I Agree.
S.K.Ojha, Member S. L. Behera, President
Dictated and corrected by me
S. L. Behera, President.
