Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/405/2013

C.Rajendran - Complainant(s)

Versus

Trans Tempo Pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

S.Venkata Krishna Kumar

06 Mar 2018

ORDER

                                                                                                                           Date of Filing  : 18.12.2012

                                                                                                                           Date of Order : 06.03.2018

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L,                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.                                :  MEMBER-I

              DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

 

CC. NO.405 /2013

TUESDAY THE 6^TH DAY OF MARCH 2018

 

C. Rajendran,

No.61, Kumaran Street,

Nespakkam,

Chennai 600 078.                                          .. Complainant

                                                            ..Vs..

 

1.  The Managing Director,

M/s. Trans Tempo Pvt. Ltd.,

No.42, Mount Road, Saidapet,

Chennai 600 015.

 

2. The Manager, (Customer Support),

Mahindra Two Wheelers Ltd.,

Mahindra Towers,,

P.K. Kurne Chowk,

Worli, Mumbai 400 018.                             ..  Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for complainant         :  M/s. S.Venkata Krishna Kumar &

                                                    Others     

Counsel for opposite party 1  :  Exparte.

Counsel for opposite party 2  :  M/s. C.G. Sunil & others

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section  12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for mental agony and also to pay Rs.5013/- being the financial loss and Rs.25,000/- towards cost of the complaint.

1. The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

          The complainant submit that he purchased a motor cycle bearing registration No.09 BA 2314 on 25.5.2009.   The vehicle was delivered as Flyte 125CC of Mahindra 2 wheelers marketed through their dealer M/s. Eswari Motors.  Further the complainant state that the vehicle was periodically serviced by the authorized sales cum service dealers M/s. Eswari Motors, Adyar and thereafter  M/s.  Trans Tempo Pvt Ltd, Saidapet.   Further the complainant state that  the engine of the motor cycle abruptly stopping while in motion; which endangers the life and property of the rider and any other road using general public.  The said problem was reported to the  1^st opposite party as early in the year 2012; the 1^st opposite party has not taken care to rectify the defects.  The complainant issued legal notice to the opposite parties after giving email communications dated 14.11.2012.    The opposite party issued reply and raised false contentions.   As such the act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.  Hence this complaint is filed.  

2.  Inspite of service of notice the 1^st opposite party called absent and set exparte. 

3. The brief averments in the written version filed by the 2^nd  opposite party is as follows:

The 2^nd opposite party deny each and every allegations except those that are specifically admitted herein.   The 2^nd opposite party submit that there is no privity of contract between the complainant and the opposite party.   The transactions between M/s. Mahindra 2 wheelers and M/s. Trans Tempo (P) Ltd., are principal to principal basis, M/s. Mahindra two wheelers will not know about the ultimate buyer of the vehicle at the time of purchase effected by the 2^nd opposite party.  As a matter of fact M/s. Mahindra two wheelers never had any transactions with the complainant.   Therefore the complaint as against this opposite party maybe dismissed in limine.    During the year 2012 the complainant had faced a problem with the engine of the vehicle and it is alleged that the engine abruptly used to stop.  It is alleged that  substantial amounts were spent by him with the 1^st opposite party, but the complaint of the vehicle could not be rectified.   It is alleged that the problem pertaining to the vehicle could not be properly diagnosed and the son of the complainant was put  to severe mental agony, economical loss and physical strain.  It is alleged that on various occasions from 11.6.2012 onwards complainant had paid an amount of Rs.5013/- towards repair charges to the 1^st opposite party but ultimately at present the vehicle is not in an usable condition.   Admittedly the vehicle was attended on periodical intervals by the 1^st opposite party i.e. on 11.6.2012, 27.7.2012, 5.9.2012, 9.10.2012, and 9.12.2012 and under normal circumstances any maintenance work done on the vehicle should precede with the vehicle being taken by the customer under full satisfaction.   The opposite party also state that there is absolutely no responsibility at all after the vehicle has crossed the warranty period for in connection with ensuring the in-durability of the components used in the vehicle and the maintenance of the vehicle.    Therefore there  is no deficiency in service on the part of the 2^nd opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.     In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A11 marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite party-2 not filed and no documents  marked on the side of the  2^nd  opposite party.

5.      The points for consideration is :

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.5013/- being the financial loss incurred towards repairs as prayed for ?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony with cost of Rs.25,000/- as prayed for ?

6.   POINTS  1 & 2 :

         The 1^st opposite party remained exparte.   The 2^nd opposite party after filing written version has not preferred to file any proof affidavit in order to prove the contentions raised in the written version.   Heard the complainant and the 2^nd opposite party counsel.  Perused the records (viz) complaint, written version of the 2^nd opposite party, proof affidavit of complainant and documents.    Admittedly the complainant purchased a motor cycle bearing registration No.09 BA 2314 on 25.5.2009.   The vehicle Flyte 125CC of Mahindra 2 wheelers marketed through their dealer M/s. Eswari Motors was delivered to the complainant.   Further the contention of the complainant is that  the vehicle was periodically serviced  by the authorized sales cum service dealers M/s. Eswari Motors, Adyar and thereafter  M/s.  Trans Tempo Pvt Ltd, Saidapet the 1^st opposite party.   Further the contention of the complainant is that  the engine of motor cycle abruptly stopping while in motion; which endangers the life and property of the rider and other road using general public.  The said problem was reported to the  1^st opposite party as early in the year 2012; but the 1^st opposite party has not taken care to rectify the defects.  The complainant expended a huge amount of Rs.5013/- towards repair charges and periodical service charges as per Ex.A1 to Ex.A6.  Every time the complainant written the mistake of abrupt stopping of the engine of the motor cycle but the opposite party has not taken any steps to rectify the defects.  Hence the complainant was constrained to keep the vehicle ideal as a waste.  The complainant issued legal notice to the opposite parties after giving email communications dated 14.11.2012 as per Ex.A7 & Ex.A8.    The opposite party issued reply Ex.A10 with false contention.  Hence the complainant was constrained to file this case claiming compensation and refund of Rs.5013/- towards repair charges.

7.     The contention of 2^nd opposite party is that  all the services were conducted by the 1^st opposite party which remained exparte.   The 2^nd opposite party have no privity of contract between the complainant.   Admittedly the complainant was purchased the motor cycle on 25.5.2009 with a  warranty for two years or 20000 kms which earlier occurs.   Till the completion of two years there was no record to prove such deficiency of abruptly stopping of engine of the vehicle.  Hence the complainant  has to rectify the defects if any and maintain the vehicle on his own cost.   Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 are repair charges and service done by the 1^st opposite party after the warranty period. The complainant has not claimed either for repair of the motor cycle or for replacement of motorcycle except claiming compensation for mental agony and refund of repair charges after the warranty period.   Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this forum is of the considered view that  the complainant used the vehicle beyond the warranty period without the alleged complaint.  After the warranty period;, the complainant has to repair the vehicle on his own cost.  It is also very clear from the records that there is no manufacturing defect.   Hence this forum is of the considered view that  the complainant is not entitled to any reliefs sought for in this case and the points are answered accordingly.

        In the result, the complaint is dismissed.  No cost.       

Dictated  by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 6^th   day of March 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                       MEMBER-II                              PRESIDENT.

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1-  11.6.2012 - Copy of Service bill.

Ex.A2-  27.7.2012 - Copy of Service Bill.

Ex.A3-  27.7.2012 - Copy of Service Bill.

Ex.A4- 5.9.2012    - Copy of Service Bill.

Ex.A5- 5.9.2012    - Copy of service bill.

Ex.A6- 9.10.2012  - Copy of service bill.

Ex.A7- 14.11.2012         - Copy of email correspondence.

Ex.A8- 17.1.2013  - Copy of legal notice.

Ex.A9-                - Copy of Postal Ack.

Ex.A10- 5.2.2013  - Copy of Reply notice by opposite party-2.

Ex.A11- 27.5.2009         - Copy of registration certificate.

 

OPPOSITE  PARTIES SIDE DOCUMENTS:  ..Nil..

 

MEMBER –I                       MEMBER-II                              PRESIDENT.