Date of Filing      : 08.10.2020

                                                                                                                 Date of Disposal : 21.11.2022

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

THIRUVALLUR

 

 BEFORE  TMT. Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, M.A.,M.L, Ph.D (Law)                                .…. PRESIDENT

                  THIRU.J.JAYASHANKAR. B.A., B.L.,                                                                        .....MEMBER -I

                 THIRU.P.MURUGAN,  M.COM.,ICWA (Inter),B.L.,                                               ......MEMBER-II

 

CC. No.24/2022

THIS MONDAY, THE 21st DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022

 

Mrs.V.Sudha, W/o.K.Venkatesan,

D2, 10 DABC, Abhinayam Phase 3,

Sri Ram Nagar Main Road, Nolambur,

Mugappair West, Chennai – 600 095.                                            ……Complainant.  

                                                                                 //Vs//

1.The Workshop Manager,

    My TVS,

    B-18, 1st Main Road, Ambattur Industrial Estate,

    Ambattur, Chennai 600 058, Tamil Nadu.

 

2.The General Manager,

    My TVS,

    Old No.3, New No.11, General Patters Road,

    Border Thottam, Anna Salai, Chennai -600 002, Tamil Nadu.

 

3.The General Manager,

   United India Insurance Company Limited,

   Old No.38 & 39, New No.77&79,

   Royapettah High Road,

   Chennai -600 014, Tamil Nadu.                                                 …..opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the complainant                        :   Mr.K.Harikrishnan, Advocate.

Counsel for the opposite parties                 :   exparte 

                         

This complaint is coming before us on various dates and finally on 01.11.2022 in the presence of Mr.K.Harikrishnan, Advocate counsel for the complainant and the opposite parties were set exparte for non appearance and upon perusing the documents and evidences of the complainant this Commission delivered the following: 

ORDER

PRONOUNCED BY TMT. Dr. S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, PRESIDENT

 

This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 alleged deficiency in service against the opposite parties in not making the repairs to the satisfaction of the complainant and in not getting the insurance claim along with a prayer to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for the negligent service rendered by the opposite parties with 12% interest per annum and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant.

Summary of facts culminating into complaint:-

The complainant had purchased a vehicle from the dealer of Mahindra & Mahindra bearing No.TN 12 F 0401, Model XUV 500, LMV and Chassis No.MAIYT2HJUE6H16313 and the said vehicle was insured with third opposite party as policy No.0101023117P114975174 dated 19.01.2018 and the policy expired on midnight of 22.01.2019.  The said vehicle was purchased for own purpose. The said vehicle met with an accident on 16.01.2019 and the same was reported to the Traffic Police on the same day and the Police issued an accident report vide CSR.No.28/2019 dated 22.01.2019.  The vehicle‘s Front Bumper, headlamp, Grill, Fender, Cross bar, Radiator, condenser and intercooler was fully damaged during accident and the said vehicle was sent for repair and service to first opposite party workshop at Ambattur Industrial Estate on 21.10.2019 as directed by the 3rd opposite party. The 1st opposite party had not reported the vehicle‘s position to 3rd opposite party on time and after reporting the vehicle condition to 3rd opposite party, the 3rd opposite party had not ascertain the vehicle damages immediately and assessed the value of the damages for claiming the amount through insurance policy.  No official communication after vehicle was laid at 1st opposite party work shop, no inspection report and no list of spares and parts damaged in the vehicle was shared with the complainant.  All the opposite parties rendered negligence of service. The complainant submits that after taking delivery of the vehicle in July 2019 with a delay of more than six months though the complainant paid balance amount of Rs.90,000/- after adjusting the insurance claim of Rs.1,58,050/-  and again taken the vehicle to 1st opposite party work shop on 05.08.2019 with complaints of;

Front Horn not working;

While reverse gear is engaged the alert sound not working;

Engine pickup is very poor;  

While crossing the speed break noise coming from front end;

Noise comes from front end as rubbing with ground;

Front bonnet door stand was not fixed properly, came out;

Wiper not changed and it creates the mark on the glass front shield making it difficult to drive;

Front passenger mat is missing;

While climbing to small steep vehicle literally stops even with full acceleration;

Front Dash board Airbag alarm still exist;

Fuel consumption and average mileage information were not displaying which makes us difficult to know the fuel left out and how far we can travel with the existing fuel.  Needs to reset the program properly to read and show correct information.

Vehicle was handed over back on 07.08.2019 without attending the complaints.  The opposite parties 1&2 was informed about the problems by email several times but despite of all the pleadings by the complainant the opposite parties 1 & 2 have not taken any steps to rectify the defect in the vehicle.  The complainant was forced to send the vehicle to Company Authorized Service Centre M/s.Zulaikha Motors Private Limited on 09.01.2020 and the said vehicle was delivered back on 14.01.2020 after a payment of Rs.48,681/- was made vide invoice No.RBR20B008848 dated 14.01.2020.  Thus aggrieved by the act of the opposite parties the present complaint has been filed for the following reliefs;

To pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for the negligent service rendered by the opposite parties with 12% interest per annum;

 To pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant.

 On the side of complainant proof affidavit was filed and submitted documents marked as Ex.A1 to A20. Though Vakalath has been filed by the opposite parties 1 to 3 they did not file any written version within the mandatory period and hence after providing sufficient opportunities the opposite parties 1 to 3 were called absent and were set exparte on 25.07.2022 for non fling of written version within the mandatory period.

Points for consideration:

Whether the alleged deficiency in service against the opposite parties in not making the repairs to the satisfaction of the complainant and in not getting the insurance claim has been successfully proved by the complainant by admissible evidence?

If so to what reliefs the complainant is entitled?

Point No.1:-

The following documents were filed on the side of complainant in support of her contentions;

Registration Certificate of the vehicle dated 23.01.2015 was marked as Ex.A1;

Insurance Certificate of the vehicle dated 19.01.2018 was marked as Ex.A2;

Vehicle inventory details given by 1st opposite party dated 21.01.2019 was marked as Ex.A3;

 Copy of CSR No.28/2019 was marked as Ex.A4;

Email correspondence to opposite parties 1 & 2 from 02.06.2019 to 07.06.2019 was marked as Ex.A5;

Legal notice issued by the complainant to the opposite parties dated 15.06.2019 was marked as Ex.A6;

Track consignment for Proof of delivery was marked as Ex.A7;

Invoice for vehicle repairs from 1st opposite party Job Card No.AJC-AMB1819-001412 dated 29.05.2019 was marked as Ex.A8;

Proof of payment to 1st opposite party dated 18.07.2019 was marked as Ex.A9;

Vehicle delivery note dated 20.07.2019 was marked as Ex.A10;

Complaints through email to 1st and 2nd opposite parties dated 09.08.2019 was marked as Ex.A11;

Invoice for vehicle repair from Zulaikha Motors dated 14.01.2020 was marked as Ex.A12;

Legal notice to the opposite parties 1 and 2 by the complainant dated 16.02.2020 was marked as Ex.A13;

Acknowledgement card for proof of delivery was marked as Ex.A14;

Legal notice issued by the complainant and the email communications between the parties were marked as Ex.A15 to Ex.A20.

The sum and substance of the oral arguments adduced by the learned counsel appearing for the complainant is that the complainant’s car met with an accident and was given for repair to the opposite parties 1 & 2 and not serviced properly.  As it was not serviced properly and the repairs not carried out to the satisfaction of the complainant, the vehicle was again given for service to the Authorized Service centre M/s.Zulaika Motors and an additional payment of Rs.48,681/- was spent by the complainant.  Further it was argued that the 1st opposite party had not reported the vehicle position to the 3rd opposite party in time and after reporting, the 3rd opposite party had not inspect the vehicle immediately and assessed the value of damages to enable the complainant to claim the insurance amount.  Thus the counsel for complainant argued that all the opposite parties jointly had committed deficiency in service respectively.

We perused the pleadings and documents submitted by the complainant. The Registration Certificate for the subject vehicle was marked as Ex.A1 and the copy of insurance policy taken for the vehicle with the 3rd opposite party was marked as Ex.A2.  The inventory details for the vehicle after the accident taken on 21.01.2019 was marked as Ex.A3.  In the said inventory details it is seen that only the body damage condition was given as bad.  Further the receipt issued by Thirumangalam Police Inspector dated 22.01.2019 was marked as Ex.A4.  According to which, the complainant’s car on 16.01.2019 dashed against the electrical poll and the front portion of the car got fully damaged.  The email communication sent by the complainant to the opposite parties 1 & 2 for causing delay in servicing the vehicle was marked as Ex.A5.  The legal notice issued by the complainant to the opposite parties was marked as Ex.A6.  The Tax Invoice dated 29.05.2019 issued by the opposite parties 1& 2 was marked as Ex.A8.  As per the said document it is seen that the labour charges for the repair of vehicle comes around Rs.34,320/- and the value of the spare parts comes to Rs.2,52,579/-.  As per Ex.A9 the bill issued by the opposite parties it is seen that an amount of Rs.1,42,173/- was provided by them and Rs.10,635/- is due as no claim bonus recovery.  The vehicle delivering report dated 20.07.2019 was marked as Ex.A10.  Ex.A11 is the email sent by the complainant informing the opposite parties that the vehicle was not serviced properly and yet repairs like front horn not working and engine pickup very poor etc. were mentioned.  The Zulaikha Motors Bill dated 14.01.2020 was marked as Ex.A12.  According to which it is seen that an amount of Rs.48,681/- has been spent.  Further the legal notice issued by the complainant and the email communications between the parties were marked as Ex.A14 to Ex.A20.

The grievance of the complainant is that the vehicle was not serviced properly by the opposite parties 1 & 2 though they have taken more than six months for servicing the vehicle.  It is seen that as per Ex.A5 series of communications the reply given by the opposite parties to the complainant stating that they admit the wrong commitment on the vehicle delivery and also requesting the complainant to take delivery of the vehicle vide email dated 03.06.2019. The document Ex.A12 dated 14.01.2020 shows that the vehicle was further serviced for Rs.48,681/-.  The vehicle from the opposite parties was seems to have taken delivery on 20.07.2019 which is evident as per document Ex.A10.  Though the vehicle was taken delivery on 20.07.2019 the further repairs were carried out only in the month of January 2020 almost after six months of delivery taken from the opposite parties. Though the complainant had submitted the invoice given by the Julaikha motors for repairing the vehicle no sufficient proof has been filed to show that at the time of delivery of the vehicle by the opposite parties 1 & 2 the works carried out by them in Zulaikha motors at the time of delivery of the vehicle were kept pending.  Thus this commission could not hold that nothing had happened in between the six months period to the vehicle and hence we are not convinced to hold that the repairs done by the Julaikha motors was in continuation of the repairs carried out by the opposite parties 1 & 2. 

 However, we are convinced with the allegation of delay in delivery as  it is amply seen that the vehicle was given for service to the opposite parties 1 & 2 as early as on 21.01.2019 soon after the accident that occurred on 16.01.2019. As per the mail of the complainant it is found that the opposite parties had promised that they would carry out the repairs within one month and give delivery of the vehicle, however, they have taken six months time to deliver the vehicle after service. This made the complainant to suffer without a vehicle for nearly six months for transportation causing hardship and mental agony in not keeping up the promise.  The opposite parties did not turn up before this commission though sufficient notice and opportunities provided to them to explain the delay in delivery of the vehicle.

 The complainant has not provided any pleadings to show that the opposite parties 1 & 2 had committed any deficiency with regard to insurance claim for the vehicle repairs.   In such circumstances we are of the view that the complainant has proved the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties only in causing delay in delivery of the vehicle. This point is answer accordingly in favour of the complainant and as against the opposite parties 1 &2. 

Point No.2:-

As we have held above that the opposite parties 1 & 2 had committed deficiency in service in causing delay in delivering the vehicle we award compensation of Rs.50,000/- to be paid to the complainant within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.  We also award Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant. 

In the result, the complaint is dismissed against the 3rd opposite party and partly allowed against the opposite parties 1 & 2 directing them jointly and severally;

a) to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) towards compensation for the mental agony caused to the complainant;

c)  to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards litigation expenses to the complainant. 

 Dictated by the President to the steno-typist, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 21st day of November 2022.

      -Sd-                                                          -Sd-                                                 -Sd-

MEMBER-II                                              MEMBER I                                    PRESIDENT

 

List of document filed by the complainant:-

 

Ex.A1 23.01.2005 Registration certificate of the vehicle. Xerox

Ex.A2 19.01.2018 Insurance certificate of the vehicle. Xerox

Ex.A3 21.01.2019 Vehicle inventory details given by 1st opposite party. Xerox

Ex.A4 22.01.2019 Copy of CSR No.28/2019. Xerox

Ex.A5 02.06.2019 Email correspondence to opposite parties 1 and 2 from 02.06.2019 to 07.06.2019. Xerox

Ex.A6 15.06.2019 Legal notice issued by the complainant to the oppsotie parties. Xerox

Ex.A7 ................. Track consignment for proof of delivery. Xerox

Ex.A8 29.05.2019 Invoice for vehicle repairs from 1st opposite party. Xerox

Ex.A9 18.07.2019 Proof of payment to 1st opposite party. Xerox

Ex.A10 20.07.2019 Vehicle Deliver note. Xerox

Ex.A11 09.08.2019 Complaints through email to opposite parties 1 & 2. Xerox

Ex.A12 14.01.2020 Invoice for vehicle repairs from Zulaikha Motors. Xerox

Ex.A13 16.02.2020 Legal notice to opposite parties 1 &2. Xerox

Ex.A14 19.02.2020 Acknowledgement card for proof of delivery. Xerox

Ex.A15 .............. Legal notice returned from 2nd opposite party. Xerox

Ex.A16 05.04.2020 Email-legal notice to 2nd opposite party through email Xerox

Ex.A17 05.04.2020 Email- legal notice to 3rd opposite party through email. Xerox

Ex.A18 12.08.2020 Legal notice reminder to opposite parties. Xerox

Ex.A19 12.08.2020 Email-legal notice reminder through email to 2nd opposite party. Xerox

Ex.A20 14.08.2020 Proof of velivery of the reminder legal notice to opposite parties. Xerox

 

List of documents filed by the opposite parties;

 

-Nil-

 

       -Sd-                                                          -Sd-                                                     -Sd-

MEMBER-II                                          MEMBER I                                     PRESIDENT