District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No. .76/2022.
Date of Institution:09.02.2022.
Date of Order:.07.07.2023.
Tarun Sharma son of Shri Ashok Sharma, resident of House No. 2247, Jawahar Colony, NIT, Faridabad.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. Thirty Six Toyota, Thirty Six Automobiles Pvt. Limited, 14/7, Mile Stone Main Mathura Road, Faridabad – 121003 Haryana, through its dealer Principal/Managing Director.
2. Mr. Chander Shekhar Nagar, Managing Director of Thirty Six Toyota, Thirty Six Automobiles Pvt. Limited, 14/7, Mile Stone Main Mathura road, Faridabad – 121003 Haryana.
3. Ravinder Verma Vice President, Thirty Six Toyota, Thirty Six Automobiles Pvt. Limited, 14/7, Mile Stone Main Mathura Road, Faridabad – 121003 Haryana.
Regd. Office
C-82, IInd floor, Niti Bagh, New Delhi – 110 049.
…Opposite parties
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Indira Bhadana………….Member.
PRESENT: Sh.P.S.Mathur, counsel for the complainant.
Sh. H.K.Sharma, counsel for opposite parties Nos.1 to 3.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant had
Purchased the Toyota Etios liva VD Model on dated 29.12.2017 amounting to Rs.6,46,099/- on dated 29.12.2017 amounting to Rs.6,46,099/- vide invoice No. INV170001580 from the opposite parties. Since purchasing of the above said vehicle, many problems were persisted the details were as under:
i) Door noise, A.C. Vent loss, Bad Plastic Molding etc.
ii) Front wheel humming sound (Product failure).
iii) Seat belt warning & Speedomater malfunctioning (speedometer replaced by service centre) product failure)
iv) Defoggen glass malfunctioning(product failure)
v) Head light switch (low beam/high beam) malfunctioning (product failure)
vi) Stereo sudden power off (product failure)
vii) Bad quality of paint on plastic parts etc.
viii) Front wheel humming sound (Product failure)
Due to the defective parts and problems in respect of the vehicle in question and the complainant made the complaint several times to sort out the said problems during the warranty period, the representative of the opposite parties always made the false excuses and lingering the matter on one pretext to the another. The complainant made the respective complaint to the opposite parties on 01.09.2020, 16.2.2020, 01.03.2020, 17.10.2020 and 25.4.2020 and 16.08.2020 through email,
whatsapp message as well as personally but no result came out upto now. The complainant informed to the service centre at 44200 kilometer, 61001 kilometer service, but the service centre agreed and addressed at 70000 kilometer service it was clear that the opposite parties had aim of service centre was to ruin the warrantee period of the vehicle of the complainant . Since purchasing of the above said vehicle, the complainant never used the said vehicle in a proper manner, The complainant sent legal notice to the opposite parties through registered post but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to:
a) sort out the problem of the vehicle and if the opposite parties failed to sort out the problem of the vehicle then to return the amount of Rs.6,46,099/- alongwith interest to the complainant.
b) pay Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs. 21,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite parties Nos.1 to 3 put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite parties Nos.1 to 3 refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that the complainant purchased one Toyotia Etios Liva VD car from opposite party No.1 issued valid invoice to the name of the complainant. After purchasing the said car, the complainant visited from time to time and he noted down some minor defects in the said car and accordingly, the same were duly rectified/removed by the answering opposite parties to the entire satisfaction of the complainant, at all times. There was 5th service of the said car which was to be done on 14th June 2020 and which was done to the entire satisfaction of the complainant, by the opposite parties, but after some time, the
complainant came alongwith his car to the opposite parties and he stated that the speed/milo meter of the car was not working properly, on 25.08.2020, till then the meter of the said car was bearing running reading 56407 kms. After that the old speed/milo meter of the said car was changed with another new one, without taking any amount from the complainant. After that the complainant visited alongwith his car to the workshop of opposite parties, on 5.10.2020, for getting services his car, till then there were running reading 2866 kms, as per new meter. On that date, the complainant filled up form by mentioning four complaints with regard his car (1) all door noise, (2) A.C not effective, (3) H.L.bulb fuse (4) Horn was not working properly. Accordingly, after checking, it was stated to the complainant, there would replacement of A.C filter and replacement of head light bulb, but at that time the complainant refused for changing the same. Whereas the complaint of door noise was removed by the opposite parties, at that time, whereas the problem in the horn of the car was due to installation from outside, hence at that time the representatives of the answering opposite parties, stated him to get change the horn, for which the complainant was to make the payment. As and when the complainant visited to opposite party No.1, then always each and every defect in the car of the complainant, was removed to his entire satisfaction, after due inspection by Chief General Technician of the opposite party No.1, but as and when the service adviser asked him for road test alongwith his car, then always herefused for the same. Opposite parties Nos.1 to 3 denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties–Thirty Six Toyota with the prayer to: a) sort out the problem of the vehicle and if the opposite parties failed to sort out the problem of the vehicle then to return the amount of Rs.6,46,099/- alongwith interest to the complainant. b) pay Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 21,000 /-as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW-1/A – affidavit of Tarun Sharma, Ex.C-1 – Retail invoice, Ex.C-2 – email, Ex.C-3 to 5– whatsapp messages, Ex.C-6 to 13 – Tax invoices, Ex.C-14 – legal notice,, Ex.C-15 – postal receipts.
On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties strongly agitated and opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite parties Ex.RW1/A – affidavit of Shir Kuldeep Sharma, Authorised person/Senior Body Shop Manager, M/s. Thirty Six Toyota, 14/7, Milestone, Main Mathura Road, Faridabad, ex.R-1 – resolution,, Ex.R-2 to 9 – Tax invoice,, Ex.C-10 (total 11 pages) – CCS sheet,, Ex.R-11 – Tax invoice,
6. During the course of arguments, Shri H.K.Sharma, counsel for opposite parties has made a statement that ”we will rectified/replace the all complaints of the vehicle, after receiving the payment from the complainant for replacement parts of vehicle in question and we will not charge any amount on account of labour charges, from the complainant.
7. On the basis of the statement of Shri H.K.Sharma, counsel for opposite parties, the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is disposed off with the direction to opposite parties to rectify/replace the all complaints of the vehicle, after receiving the payment from the complainant for replacement parts of the vehicle in question. Opposite parties are also directed not to charge any amount on account of labour charges from the complainant. There are no order as to costs. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 07.07.2023 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
