| Final Order / Judgement | CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION – X GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area (Behind Qutub Hotel) New Delhi – 110016 Case No.140/12 Mr. Amit Goenka Aged about 30 years S/o Shri. Santosh Kumar Agarwal Residing at 159A, Block –B Lake Town Kolkata-700089. …..COMPLAINANT Vs. Transocean Express Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Having it registered office at No.501-504, a wing Bonanza Sahar Plaza, Andheri (E), Mumbai-59. Transocean Express Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Represented by its Regional Manager Having its regional office at Block B-1 Plot B-2, Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate Mathura Road New Delhi-110044. …..RESPONDENTS Date of Institution-11.04.2012 Date of Order-19.04.2024 O R D E R RITU GARODIA-MEMBER - The complaint pertains to deficiency in service on part of OP in transport of a car from one city to another.
- According to the complaint, the complainant was employed in New Delhi and required his car, a Maruti SX-4 with registration number DL7CH2089, to be transported to Calcutta due to a change in workplace. The complainant engaged OP-2 for this service. Agents representing OP-2, which operates as a branch office of OP-1, facilitated the booking of the car for transportation on 23.07.2011, issuing consignment note number 00000316. OP produced an inventory report noting minor dents and scratches on the car.
- It is alleged that vehicle was to be delivered within 7 days from the date of booking by a trailer. The complainant did not receive the car within time. He requested OP time and again for the delivery of the car.
- On 11.8.2011, the car was delivered to the complainant in an extremely damaged condition. It is alleged that the said car was driven by road and not sent through a trailer as promised. It is further alleged that OP got the car repaired without intimation to the complainant. It is submitted that the representatives of OP-1 endorsed the damaged suffered at the back of POD receipt at the time of delivery. It is further submitted that OP had agreed to bear all expenses towards the said car.
- The complainant sent the vehicle to authorized Maruti service station at Camac Street, Kolkata for complete overhauling. The Maruti service station after preliminary assessment of damages, raised a quotation of roughly about Rs.90,000/-. It was further informed that the airbag of the car was damaged and it will require additional Rs.150,000/- for rectification. The complainant forwarded the quotation to the OP. The complainant got to learn from the Maruti service station that the car had most probably met an accident and has been repaired by some incompetent local garage person during transit from New Delhi to Kolkata.
- Several emails were exchanged between the parties. The complainant did not receive the repair costs from OP. The complainant took his car from Maruti service station after paying the bill amounting to Rs.96,418/- and Rs.20,789/- towards repair and labour charges respectively.
- The complainant prays for refund of Rs.96,418/- and Rs.20,789/-. The complainant further prays for cost of damaged air bag amounting to Rs.1,50,000/-, cost of taxi fare amounting to Rs.30,000/-, compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.1,00,000/-. The complainant further prays for an interest 18% on the total amount.
- OP in its reply states that the car had run 42596 kilometers and had major dent at the time of handing over the car. OP alleged that the car might have earlier met with some accident as only an external inventory report is prepared at the time of handing over the vehicle. OP is relying on terms and conditions which mentions that the vehicle was being transported under owner’s risk and the complainant should have taken proper insurance cover.
- OP clarifies that the car was delivered in perfectly healthy working condition. It is alleged that representative have explained to the complainant there might be a delay due to unforeseen circumstances. OP explains that the delivery was delayed due to circumstances beyond their control. OP further submits that the car was transported through the trailer.
- It is alleged that the complainant did not take any photographs of the vehicle with pre-existing scratches and dents and the photographs by the complainant taken post-delivery of vehicle could not be relied upon. It is alleged that the complainant should have intimated the insurance before sending the car for service and repair. OP prays for dismissal of complaint with cost.
- The complainant in its rejoinder submits that the representative of OP made a list of damages in the vehicle.
- The complainant avers that there will be no delay in the delivery of the vehicle. The complainant has filed the policy documents and a report by automobile workshop.
- Complainant has filed evidence by way of affidavit and exhibited the following documents:-
- Copy of the consignment note is exhibited as Exhibit CW-1/1.
- Copy of Car Inventory Report is exhibited as Exhibit CW-1/2.
- Copy of proof of delivery is exhibited as Exhibit CW-1/3.
- Copy of emails are exhibited as Exhibit CW-1/4 to 1/7.
- Copy of the email alongwith photographs of damaged car parts are
exhibited as Exhibit CW-1/8. - Copy of emails are exhibited as Exhibit CW-1/9 to 1/12.
- Copy of insurance cover is exhibited as Exhibit CW-1/13.
- Copy of certificate issued by authorised dealer is exhibited as Exhibit
-
- Copy of bills are exhibited as Exhibit CW-1/15.
- Copy of legal notice is exhibited as Exhibit CW-1/16.
- Copy of reply to legal notice is exhibited as Exhibit CW-1/17.
- OP-1 & 2 has filed evidence by way of affidavit of Mr. Devender Mathur working as business development auditor.
- The Commission has considered the facts and material on record. The consignment note dated 03.07.2011 shows that the car bearing No. DL7CH-2089 was being transported from New Delhi to Calcutta. The meter reading shows 42596 kilometres. Remarks by OP are as follows:
“a. SCRATCHES Right side Bumper(Sic) scratches bumper(Sic) loss and scratche all body normal scratches b. DENTS back bumpar dents. Right side door under dents and c. ANY OTHER VISIBLE OBSERVATIONS ” - At the time of the delivery, the complainant has mentioned the condition of the car which is as follows :
“State/condition of car which received in Lake Town Kolkata at 17.22 hrs on Thursday, 11th August,2011: - Windscreen broken/smashed
- Dashboard Loose
- Dashborad scratched on left side
- Car Horn not working
- Indicators not working
- Brake Lights not working
- Lineout of wheels, car turning to either side, not keeping straight, not in
proper drivable condition - AC not working at all, throwing hot air
- Driver’s side gate broken from inside
- Autocop not working properly.”
- Several emails were exchanged. The complainant intimated the OP that the car had met with an accident during transport and sent an estimate. OP vide email dated 16.08.2011 stated as follows:
- The complainant vide email dated 16.08.2011 clarified that insurance would not sanction any amount for accidental damage as the car have already been repaired from an unknown place by OP. The complainant also annexed the photographs of the car. The said photographs show damage to the windshield of the car and white scratches on the right side door. The complainant has placed bills dated 27.09.2011 and 28.09.2011 for repair on record.
- A report by AUTO STAR, an authorised dealer and workshop dated 24.01.2013 is as follows:
- This is to certify that, we have received the Car No .DL 7CH 2089 of Mr. Amit Goenka on 13th August,2011. The car was assessed by our supervisor and it was observed that the car had been already repaired at some place.
Following observations were noted at the time of inspecting the vehicle.The observations are as follows which indicated that the car has me with an accident: - The air bag sign was glowing. The wiring & other accessories related to Air Bags were tampered and found damaged
- A/c Pipe Joint were tampered, broken and were loose at ends
- Front Aprons were found bend/dented due to heavy accidental impact.
- Fr. Drive shaft was touching/brushing the Apron. The Shaft was miss-aligned.
- Wiring harness was repaired and tampered
- Various small problems were also noted
- Front bumber, both fenders and other body parts were also repainted to make the vehicle look like new
Since the car was repaired without prior information to the insurance company the same cannot be intimated to the insurance company as the insurance policy terms & condition, it is clearly mentioned that the claim is not payable if the repaired job is carried without the consent of the insurance company and also if the damage/accident is already repaired.” - The delivery receipt indicates significant damage to the car, including a broken windshield and driver-side door, non-functional components such as horn indicators, brake lights, A/C, and autocop, as well as a loose dashboard, scratches on the left side, and misaligned wheels. In response to this, OP sent an email acknowledging the issue and dispatched an investigation team to determine the root cause. However, OP has yet to submit the investigation report as promised.
- The attached photographs clearly depict the extent of damage sustained by the car, including a broken windshield, a damaged front headlight, severe dents, and prominent white scratches across its body.
- The report from the authorized service centre reveals that upon receiving the car, it was evident that repairs had been undertaken at some previous point. The service centre further itemizes a list of broken parts and identifies repaired and tampered components. Notably, the report highlights that the repairs were executed without prior notification to the insurance company, rendering any claims invalid.
- Consequently, OP's service was deficient, as evidenced by their involvement in the accident during transport and their subsequent engagement in unfair trade practices by authorizing repairs without informing the complainant. Moreover, OP further failed in their service obligations by delivering the vehicle to the complainant in a damaged state.
- Hence, we find OP guilty of deficiency in service and direct OP to pay 1. Rs.1,17,207/-(96418/- +20,789/-) with 9% interest from date of delivery of the vehicle i.e. 11.08.2011 till realisation.
- Rs. 25,000/-as compensation towards mental harassment and agony.
- Rs. 5,000/- towards litigation expenses.
25. Order to be uploaded and file be consigned to record room. | |
