Orissa

Debagarh

CC/17/2020

Suranjit Mahapatra, age 34 years, S/O-Tapan Mahapatra - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

04 Jun 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION, DEOGARH

C.C NO-17/2020

Present-Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President  & Smt. Artati Das,Member

Suranjit Mahapatra, age 34 years,

S/O-Tapan Mahapatra,

At-Purohitsahi,Deogarh,

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

                                                               Vrs.

1. The Proprietor,

          UNITECH Motors,

          Rajamunda, Deogarh,

          P.O/P.S/Dist-Deogarh-768108.                 

2. The Authorised Dealer, Maa Sambaleswari Motors

           NH-6, Ainthapali, Near Income Tax Office,

          Sambalpur, Orissa – 768004

3. The Manufacturer,

          A-3, Industrial Area, Noida-Dadri Road, 

           Surajpur -201306, Distt. Gautam Budh Nagar (U.P.)                                …..O.Ps.

 

For the Complainant:-Self

For the O.P-1:-Self

For the O.P-2:-None

For the O.P-3:-Sri R.L. Pradhan, Advocate & Associate.

 

Date of Hearing-dtd.13.05.2021, Date of Order dtd. 04.06.2021

Present-Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President- The Complainant has purchase a Yamaha MT 15-ABS from the O.P-1 who is a Sub- Dealer of Yamaha having Chassis No-ME1RG5913K0010307 and Engine No-G3K5E0054166 on dtd 16.05.2019. and Rs. 1,64,674/- as full and final consideration. After using the bike for 5-6 months he found the engine of the said bike is producing very high noise with vibration in handle for which the Complainant was not able to ride the bike comfortably. The mater was reported on dtd.  05.05.2019 to the O.P-1, conveyed his inability to solve the defect and advised the Complainant to have a contact with the O.P-2. On making contact with the O.P-2 over mobile phone, he denied to have responsibility as the Complainant has not purchased the bike directly from the showroom of the O.P-2 and suggested him to consult with the O.P-1. But the Service Manager of the O.P-2 in response to the Complainant, directed him to bring the motorcycle to his showroom at Sambalpur.   But O.P-2 did not allow for servicing of the bike and again the complainant had to avail service from the O.P-1 but the defect was not removed as the technician could not ascertain the defects. Again the O.P-2 had sent a mechanic who attend the call at Deogarh but left unrepaired. The Complainant has no more faith on the motorcycle as from the beginning it started to give problems. So from that day the motorcycle is lying in the garage of the O.P-1 in idle condition.

As per the O.P-1, a Yamaha MT 15-ABS Motorcycle having chassis no-ME1RG5913K0010307 and Engine No-G3K5E0054166 has been delivered by the him on dtd 16.05.2019 to the Complainant on payment of Rs. 1,64,674/- as full and final consideration. The Ex-showroom price of the bike was Rs. 1,36,000/-. The Complainant after 5-6 months reported to the O.P-1 that there is an abnormal noise from the Engine of the Motorcycle along with vibration in handle. The technician engaged by the O.P-1 on dtd.  05.05.2019 have attended to the vehicle during the warranty period free of charges and had carried out necessary repairs and replacement of the components to the satisfaction of the complainant.  But again the engine sound continued from the Engine and the fault could not be detected by the Technician of the O.P-1 for which the Complainant made contact with the O.P-2, the Authorised Service Centre of O.P-3. The Service Manager of the O.P-2 directed to bring the motorcycle to his showroom as he is expecting some service problem in the said motorcycle. But the Complainant was become reluctant to take the Motorcycle to Sambalpur as it would be expensive for him. So finding no other way, the O.P-1 has taken the said Motorcycle to the Authorised Service Centre of YAMAHA at Angul on dtd. 06.07.2020 at his own cost to maintain the goodwill with the Complainant. The Motorcycle was needed to be undergoing FI Testing and there is no facilities available at the Sub-dealer point of the O.P-1 and these facilities are only become available at Dealer Point. That Technician at Angul Service Centre carried out through inspection of the Motorcycle within warranty period as there is some engine problem and starting problem as complained by the Complainant. The Service Manager after carrying out through inspection observed that the Magnet Bolt fitted was loose for which the engine was making abnormal sound and the same was replaced under warranty. A Dynamic Inspection of the Motorcycle was made at the Authorised Service Centre and the result was found to be NORMAL. It was confirmed that the defect was not a manufacturing defect but a normal wear and tear in due course of riding the Motorcycle. Due to non availability of staff during the COVID-19 period, the repair work took some time and ultimately the Motorcycle was ready for delivery on dtd.27.07.2020.  The O.P-1 intimated the Complainant through a letter to take delivery of the Motorcycle as it was now trouble free but the Complainant became adamant and did not respond to the letter. The Motorcycle is till now lying in the service Centre of the O.P-1. The O.P-1 has claimed that it is not under any obligation to take back the Motorcycle or repay the sale price to the complainant.

            As per the O.P-3 the Complainant has purchased the above said motorcycle from the O.P-1 after being satisfied with the performance he took delivery of the same. No defect was pointed out at that time. The relationship of the O.P-3 with the O.P-2 on Principal to Principal basis. The O.P-3 does not sell any motorcycle to any individual customer. The O.P has provided warranty for two years or 30,000 kms whichever is earlier from the date purchase. But the same are extend to certain parts which have found to manufacturing defect and not on complete motorcycle. The O.P undertakes to repair, replace free of costs, the parts that are found to have manufacturing defects but not to the parts which are damaged due to mis handling or negligent treatment or by accidental damage. On dtd. 02.06.2019 the Complainant for the first time brought the motorcycle for the general servicing and did not complained of any defect and periodic service was carried out by the service engineer and the motorcycle was delivered to the Complainant.  On dtd. 27.06.2020  after more than one year the complainant brought the motorcycle to the O.P-1  but did not raise any defect and servicing was done. Only on dtd. 06.07.2020 the Complainant raised complains to the O.P-1 alleging the problem of abnormal noise and start problem. On observation it was found that the magnet clutch bolt was loose thereby causing some noise and vibration.

POINTS OF DETERMINATION:-

1. Whether the Complainant is comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act-2019?
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 comes under the purview of Consumers as he has purchased a Motorcycle from the O.P-1. Apart from complaint relating to noise from engine and vibration of handle there was no other major defect- and it was got removed by the O.P-1 accordingly.   It is also to be considered that whenever the vehicle was brought to the OP No.1 with any problem, the defect was removed by repairs or replacing relevant parts, which the Complainant was mandated under warranty.   The O.P-1 has made several personal contact and ultimately intimated the Complainant on dtd. 27.07.2020 to take the Motorcycle as it was repaired but the Complainant never responded to the same. It is true that the warranty included only repairs and replacement of parts and the change of whole vehicle is not mandated.  It is important to note that the vehicle had run about 15,394 km in the first 14 months.  Hence there is no case is made out for replacement of the vehicle at this stage. Had there been any serious manufacturing defect, it would not have been possible to run the vehicle for so many kilometers. This matter has been well settled in the case of “M/S Tata Motors Ltd., vs Sharad & Anr.” on 19 May, 2016 decided by National Consumer Disputes Redressal,   New Delhi. So we are of the considered view that the complainant has suffered lot of inconvenience and misery due to improper functioning of the vehicle right from the initial days of purchase. As no purchaser of a new vehicle would ever think that he would be going to garage to get the vehicle repaired so often even if the repairs may be minor.    If this has happened, the purchaser is definitely liable to receive some compensation for inconvenience and mental agony faced by him due to supply of a vehicle having some defects.  The O.P-1 & 3 has no role in the alleged deficiency in service hence they are set free from the above charges. Hence we order as under:-

 ORDER

That the Complaint petition is allowed. The O.P-2 is directed to provide an extended warranty towards the Motorcycle in question for another 08(Eight Months) from the date of date of delivery of the said Motorcycle to the Complainant. Further the O.P-2 is directed to pay an amount of Rs.60,000/-(Rupees Sixty Thousand) by way of compensation to the Complainant for causing him mental, physical and financial loss and agony and Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand) as litigation costs. This amount shall be paid by the OPs to the Complainant within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, failing which the OP-2 shall pay interest @ 9% per annum on this amount from the date of filing the complaint, i.e., 01.07.2013 till its realisation."The Complainant is directed to receive the said Motorcycle from the O.P-1 within 07(Seven) days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Order pronounced in the open Court today i.e, on 4^th of June 2021 under my hand and seal of this Commission.

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

I agree,         

 

MEMBER                                                                                                PRESIDENT  

                                                            Dictated and Corrected

                                                                             by me.

 

                                                                     PRESIDENT