Date of Filing: 14/08/2018 Date of Order:20/03/2019 BEFORE THE BANGALORE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE - 27. Dated:20th DAY OF MARCH 2019 PRESENT SRI.H.R. SRINIVAS, B.Sc., LL.B. Rtd. Prl. District & Sessions Judge And PRESIDENT SRI D.SURESH, B.Com., LL.B., MEMBER COMPLAINT NO.546/2018 COMPLAINANTS : | | CHIRAG.V.R. Age 26 years, No.27 Nandagokula 4th Main, Brindavan Layout Arekere, Bangalore 560 076. Phone : 9986994589, Email-chirag9739@gmail.com. (Complainant-In person) | |
Vs OPPOSITE PARTIES: | 1 | THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BANGALORE MOTORS PVT. LTD., 41/T.M. Industrial Estate, 12th Km Mysore road Rajarajeswari Nagar Zone, Bangalore 560 059. Email-salesmys@vw- bangaloremptors.co.in Ph: 9686610756. | | | 2 | THE SERVICE MANAGER, VOLKSWAGEN PALACE CROSS, Bangalore Motors Pvt. Ltd., New Corporation, No.1/1, KodiBasavanna Temple Street, 4th ‘m’ Block, Rajajnagar, Bangalore 560 010. Ph: 080232022, 23202270. | | 3 | VOLKSWAGEN GROUP SALES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED. 401 & 402, 4th floor, A & B Wing, Silver Utopia, Cardinal Gracious Road, Chakala, Andheri (east) Mumbai, Maharashtra 400 099. Ph: 02233137000. (Sri N.Kumar Adv. for O.P 1 & 2) (Ms.Chetana Adv. for O.P -3) |
| | |
| | |
ORDER
BY SRI.H.R.SRINIVAS, PRESIDENT.
1. This is the Complaint filed by the Complainant U/S Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the Opposite Parties (herein referred in short as O.Ps) alleging manufacturing defect in the vehicle purchased by him for refund of the value of the car i.e. Rs.10,87,198/- and insurance amount of Rs.38,029/- and Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation for the zero safety of the car, for mental and physical trauma suffered and missing the work every time by being called to service station and for other reliefs as this forum deems fit under circumstances of this complaint.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that: Complainant purchased a POLO GT TDI car from OP No.1 and 2 which was manufactured by OP.No.3by paying Rs.10,87,198/- and getting the same registered to his name on 02.08.2017 and the registrationbearing No.KA-51-MK-7444. After the purchase of the car, within one month, it started giving trouble.There was wobbling in the wheels.The same was informed on 21.10.2017 and he was made to wait for providing service. He waited till 2 0 clock and at 2.30 pm, the advisor came and discussed. He informed the advisor that while he was driving the vehicle at 140 K/ph speed, when breaks were applied, the car used to drag to its left and the wheels were wobbling.The same was taken to test drive and the said advisor informed that it has some issue of alignment. He did not get the alignment tested when he took the vehicle to Chennai. Again on 05.12.2017 when he took the vehicle to OPs, one Sudarshan took the vehicle for test drive and inspected the same at 140 KM/ph and informed that there is an issue with the breaking system and the same was informed to the Manager and told him to put a job card in that respect.
3. After two days, on 07.12.2017, he was informed by the advisor that the vehicle is ready and he went and inspected the same. There was some scratches on the rear left side of the door. He questioned them as to how it happened. When he was driving the vehicle on 09.12.2017, an autodriver told him that some smoke coming from the left wheel. He stopped the vehicle for about an hour and informed the same to OPs and he took the car to the service station and discussed with them and requested them for replacement. He again took the vehicle to the service center regarding the same problem and a video was taken in respect of wobbling in the wheel. Again on 23.01.2018, he took delivery of his car but still, the same problem persisted and he could not control his car when it was running at 140 K/ph. On 12.02.2017, the vehicle was taken for a test drive on the NICE road along with manager Smt.Usha and a supervisor. The supervisor did not agree that there is an issue in that respect. The service management of the Volkswagan has not taken responsibility.
4. Owning such a car is highly insecured to travel along with family.The management does not care for the human life.They have not rectified the problem in spite of giving the vehiclesix times for checkup and repair. There is deficiency in service. There is negligent act on the part of Op and they are unprofessional. Hence the complaint.
5. Upon service of notice, OP No.1 and 2 appeared before the Forum and filed their joint version contending that they are the reputed dealers and authorized service center having an excellent workshop set up and servicing the vehicle manufactured by Volkswagan. There is no truth in the allegations made in the complaint.It is mere abuse of the process of law. Complainant has suppressed material fact.He do not fall under the definition of Consumer and there is no deficiency of service on their part. The allegations made are vague and baseless. There is no manufacturing defect in the vehicle. No relief can be granted under Section 14 of the Consumer Protection Act and the complainant has to show the manufacturing defects in the vehicle for replacing the same or refunding the cost of the vehicle. There is no manufacturing defect at all in the vehicle. The complaint is liable to be dismissed under Section 26 of the Consumer Protection Act as it is filed on false, frivolous vexatious and misconceived facts. The Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as it involves detail evidence. This complaint cannot be decided in a summary manner.
6. The complainant purchased the vehicle from them and got it registered in his name. They are the service provider and the vehicle has been sold to the complainant with limited warranty and extended warranty in accordance with the terms and conditions mentioned therein.
7. On 05.12.2017 the car was brought to OPs workshop and by that time, it had covered 6,349 km which is clear that complainant has used the said car extensively from the date of purchase. The said car was brought to the workshop regarding break shuddering at a speed of 130KM to 140 km. The break lining and break disc were replaced free of cost as it was covered under the warranty and labour cost was also free. Again on 26.12.2017, when the vehicle had covered 7,415 km the complainant brought the vehicle with the complaint that there is wobbling on the left hand side when the vehicle was to be stopped at a speed of 120 KM/ph and there was noise from the left hand side and there was some headlamp issues.
8. The inspection and repair were conducted and the problems were set right and the vehicle was handed over to the complainant to his satisfaction. Again on 08.01.2018, when the vehicle had covered 7,969 kmagain the vehicle was brought to the service station with the complaint that there is wobbling in the wheel, and the vehicle drags to right hand side when the breaks were applied. After investigation the defects were found and corrected free of cost to the satisfaction of the complainant. Hence, there is no deficiency in service on their part or there is any manufacturing defect.It is a routine repair. The vehicle was left with them for repair due to normal wear and tear of the vehicle. The prayer of the complainant cannot be granted and prayed to dismiss the complaint.
9. In order to prove the case, both the parties filed their affidavit evidence and produced documents. Arguments Heard.The following points arise for our consideration:-
1) Whether the complainant has proved
deficiency in service on the part of the
Opposite Parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to
the relief prayed for in the complaint?
10. Our answers to the above points are:-
POINT NO.1: In the negative
POINT NO.2: In the negative.
For the following.
REASONS
POINT No.1 & 2:-
11. Upon perusal of the complaint, the affidavit evidence and the documents, it becomes clear that Complainant purchased POLO GT TDI car from OP No.1 and 2 which was manufactured by OP.No.3 by paying Rs.10,87,198/- and getting the same registered to his name on 02.08.2017,the registration bearingNo.KA 51 MK 7444.
12. It is the specific case of the complainant that when he applied the break of the car when it was at 120 km to 140 km speed,the vehicle used to drag to its right and left and the same wasbrought to the notice of the OP and they could not set it right and hence there is a manufacturing defect in the vehicle.
13. Upon perusing the job card produced by OP, the vehicle was taken to the OP by the complainant at regular interval for the same complaint i.e., brakeshudderingat 130 to 140 kmspeed. OP used to check the important parts of the same and provide suitable repairs. Complainant has issued satisfaction note on each and every occasion. Even the break lining, break disk have been replaced.
14. Complainant has also complained to the OP regarding wobbling to left side when it was running at 120 kmspeed per hour. All the checks were made by the Op as per checklist and the nuts and bolts were tightened and suitable lubrication was done. Head light was fixed. Free inspection was also done as per their manual. It is to be noted here that these are all the running problems and in one of the emails sent by the complainant, it is mentioned that when the vehicle was driven at 130 kmspeed per hour it was making lot of noise and when applied break, he used to loose control over the vehicle. The test drive was taken by the complainant along with repair team by the OP and they also noted that there is a wobbling issue in the vehicle and there is shuddering in the car at the speed at 120 km when the breaks were applied and used to drag on the front wheel of the car.
15. It is also mentioned there in that the cause for the same probably due to the heat produced at the time of applying the break at 120 km speed and above. When this is taken into consideration, it is be considered that the complainant is very rash, negligent, carelessness in driving the vehicle. Driving motor car ina reckless speed and high speed so as endanger life of person/animal amounts crime under Indian Penal Code and under Motor Vehicle Act and liable for imprisonment and fine. Luckily for him, so far, no report by police in respect of committing any accident due to his rash and negligent act. One has to be more careful, diligent and smooth in driving the vehicle and should not commit any accident so as to harm any innocent persons.
16. There is no material evidence placed to show that there is a manufacturing defect in the vehicle especially in the breaking system. Though the vehicles aremanufactured to achieve the speed of 200 to 220 kmspeed per hour, the Indian road condition are not suitable to drive the said vehicle in a such a high speed. One has to control the speed while driving the car though it is capable going in a high speed.
17. The problems made out by the complainant in respect of the breaking system, wobbling are all running problems of the vehicle. In view of this, the complainant has not made out a case of any manufacturing defect by producing expert report in that respect, and deficiency in service on the part of the OPsas he has given a satisfactory report in respect of the repair work carried out by the OPs.It appears to us that, the complainant has filed this complaint whimsically and has abused the process of law and dragged the OPs unnecessarily to litigation for which he has to be penalized by imposing heavy costs. Hence we answer POINT No.1 and 2 in the Negativeand pass the following:-
ORDER
- The Complaint is hereby dismissed with cost.
- Complainant is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to each of the Opposite Parties towards litigation expenses.
- Complainant is hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and submit the compliance report to this forum within 15 days thereafter.
4. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.
Note:You are hereby directed to take back the extra copies of the Complaints/version, documents and records filed by you within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
(Dictated to the Stenographer over the computer, typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this 20th MARCH 2019)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
ANNEXURES
1. Witness examined on behalf of the Complainant/s by way of affidavit:
CW-1 | Sri CHIRAG.V.R.- Complainant |
Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:
Ex P1: Copy of Invoice and receipts details.
Ex P2: Copy of the cheque paid at the time of booking of the car.
Ex. P3: Copy of the Inspection Report.
Ex P4: CD.
Ex P5: Email communications.
Ex P6: Photo copy of the car left door.
Ex. P7: Copy of the warranty extension certificate and invoice.
Ex P8: Copy of the toll bills.
Ex P9: Copy of car loan statement.
Ex P10: Copy of the tax invoice of the replacement of the parts.
2. Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite party/s by way of affidavit:
RW-1: Sri PrabhakarRao, Deputy General Manager of O.P.1& 2
RW-2:Mr.RejithlalAchuthanCheekkonnummal, AGM of OP-3.
Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Opposite Party/s
Ex R1:Copy of Running Repair work order Dt:19.01.2018.
Ex R1:Copy of Check list.
Ex R2:Copy of Tax Invoice, dt: 18.01.2018.
Ex R3:Copy of repair order, dt:18.1.2018.
Ex R4:Copy of Satisfaction Note dt: 23.01.2018.
Ex R5:Copy of Satisfaction note dt: 23.1.2018.
Ex R6:Copy of Repair order dated: 18.01.2018.
Ex R7:Copy of running repair work order dt: 05.12.2017.
Ex R8: Copy of Check list.
Ex R9:Copy of Repair Order dt: 05.12.2017.
Ex R10:Copy of Satisfaction Note, dt: 24.1.2018.
Ex R11:Copy of Reference dt: 05.12.2017.
Ex R12: Tax Invoice dt:5.12.2017
Ex R13:Copy of Customer Acknowledgement form.
Ex R14:Copy of Feedback Form.
Ex R15:Copy of customer order Description dt: 05.12.2017.
Ex R16:Copy of repair order dt: 05.12.2017.
Ex R17:Copy of Running repair work order dt: 26.12.2017.
Ex R18:copy of check list.
Ex R19:Copy of repair order dt: 26.12.2017.
Ex R20:Copy of Tax Invoice dt: 26.12.2017.
Ex R21:Copy of check list.
Ex R22:Copy of User Manual.
Ex R23:Copy of Customer order description dt:26.12.2017.
Ex R24: Copy of DISS
Ex R25: Copy of Warranty Policy.
Ex R26: Copy of authorization letter.
Ex R27:Copy of new vehicle terms and conditions, warranty coverage.
Ex R28:Copy of Invoices.
Ex R29: Copy of satisfaction note.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
A*
