Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/122/2020

Sh. Vishal Sonak - Complainant(s)

Versus

Skoda Auto Volkswagan India Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Gaurav Gupta

29 Sep 2022

ORDER

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint  No

:

122 of 2020

Date  of  Institution 

:

19.02.2020

Date   of   Decision 

:

29.09.2022

 

 

 

 

 

Sh.Vishal Sonak aged 31 years son of Sh.Manoj Kumar, resident of Flat No.41, First Floor, Dream Homes, Kishanpura, Dhakoli, Zirakpur, Teshil Derabassi, Distt. SAS Nagar (Mohali).

             …..Complainant

 

Versus

 

1]  Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Pvt. Ltd., having its registered office at 4th Floor, Silver Utopia, Cardinal Gracious road, Chakala, Andheri East, Mumbai 400099 through its Managing Director.

 

2]  Lally Motors Volkswagen Chandigarh having its registered office at Plot No.9, Industrial Area, Phase-1, Chandigarh trough its Manager.

 

3]  Goodyear India Limited having its registered Office at Mathura Road, Ballabgarh, Faridabad 121004, Haryana (India) through its Managing Director.

 

    ….. Opposite Parties

 

 

BEFORE:  SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA        PRESIDING MEMBER 

                    SH.B.M.SHARMA                 MEMBER

                               

For Complainant : Sh.Vishal Sonak, Advocate

For OPs         : OP No.1 exparte

   Sh.Devinder Kumar, Adv. for OP No.2.

   Sh.Inderjit Singh, Adv. for OP No.3.

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, PRESIDING MEMBER

         Concisely put, the complainant on 30.5.2019 purchased a Volkswagon Polo Highline Plus Petrol Car, being Regd. No.PB-70F-3867 from OP No.2, an authorized dealer of OP No.1 and in the said car, the tyres of OP No.3 company were fitted (Ann.C-1). It is stated that on 15.1.2020, the complainant and his family were coming from Chandigarh to their home and during the drive, one of the tyre of the car got burst on the way and all the air from the tyre got leaked.  The complainant used stepney tyre and reached home.  It is also stated that on the next day, the complainant noticed that another tyre of his car is also in bulgy state.  The matter was reported to OPs No.2 & 3, whereupon the official of OP No.3 inspected the tyres.  However, the OP No.3 rejected the claim of the complainant for replacement of defective tyres of the car. It is stated that the car of the complainant had covered only 24000kms whereas the warranty of the tyres are for 45000 kms -65000 kms. The complainant also sent legal notice to OPs in this regard, but to no avail (Ann.C-2 & C-3).  Ultimately, the complainant had to purchase the tyres at his own at cost of  Rs.11,800/-.  Alleging the above rejection of his claim as illegal and deficient act on the part of OPs, hence this complaint has been filed.

 

2]       OP No.1 did not turn up despite service of notice, hence it was proceeded exparte vide order dated 04.10.20221.

 

         The OP No.2- Lally Motors has filed its reply and while admitting the factual matrix of the case, stated that the Engineer of answering OP on 22.1.2020 inspected the vehicle and intimated the complainant that tyre issue relates to OP No.3.  It is also submitted that even OP No.3 inspected the tyre in the presence of the complainant. It is submitted that tyre issue concerns with OP No.3 and to provide service to the complainant, on the visit of the complainant, OP No.2 immediately call OP No.3 and thereafter inspection was done by OP No.3, thus there is no deficiency or unfair trade practice on the part of OP No.2. Lastly it is prayed that the complaint qua OP NO.2 be dismissed.

 

         OP No.3 has also filed reply and while admitting the factual matrix of the case, stated that answering OP No.3 received the complainant’s complaint on 18.1.2020 regarding ‘sidewall buldge” in the front left tyre and rear left tyre of complainant’s car and immediately the answering OP deputed Technical Expert to inspect the complainant’s car tyre.  It is submitted that the technical Expert of answering OP Company found that there was no manufacturing defect/deficiency in the tyres but the tyres were damaged due to external factors.  It is stated that the ‘bulge’ on the sidewall of the tyre is not due to any manufacturing related deficiency but due to breakage of plycords which is resultant of when the vehicle is driven on external object/road hazards such as pot holes, kerbs, bumps, debris on the road and or impact by external blunt object, in under/over-inflation and/or when a vehicle is driven in on an external blunt object at high speed or hits road hazards. 

 

3]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

4]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have perused the entire record including written arguments.   

 

5]       The perusal of file reveals that the complainant’s claim about defect in two tyres of his newly purchased vehicle, has been declined by OP No.3 alleging it to be result of external object/road hazards and not a result of any manufacturing defect, as alleged by complainant.

 

6]       The OP No.3 has placed on record the Report of Technical Expert as Ann.RW-3/1 to support their version, wherein it has specifically been held that-

“Tyre inspected in demounted condition and thoroughly an observation FL tyre impact break/pinching found and RL tyre sidewall through damage found due to external object/road hazard. No manufacturing deficiency found….”  

 

7]       This Technical Expert Report placed on record by OP No.3 has not been rebutted by the complainant by way of filing any Expert Opinion to the contrary, so there is no reason to disbelieve this Technical Expert Report of OP No.3.  Also the distance covered by the vehicle in question i.e. 24000 kilometers within a period of about 6 months prove its extensive use on daily basis.

 

8]       Taking into consideration the above discussion and findings, we are of the opinion that the complainant has not been able to prove his case.  Therefore, the present complaint, be devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.   

Announced

29th September, 2022                                                                       Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(B.M.SHARMA)

MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.