R. ANAND Vs. MARIKAR MOTORS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant having failed in his attempt before the lower forum to recover Rs.1 lakh from the respondents, on the ground of deficiency in their service, has approached this commission for the same relief.

(2.) The 1st respondent is the dealer for the 2nd respondent, who is manufacturing motorcycle under the brand name Royal Enfield. The appellant/ complainant purchased a motorcycle from the 1st opposite party / 1st respondent, on 9.12.2002, which is registered as TN-10 E 8418 and the name of the motorcycle is Thunderbird. Within a month from the date of purchase, the motorcycle began to give problem, which was informed to the 1st opposite party, who attended the repair work, but failed to inform the details of job work done. In the motorcycle there were over vibration, Rim rusting, engine leakage, gear box oil leakage, front rear break problem, mileage drop and failure to pickup speed, in addition to wobbling. The complainant noticed the said problems in March 2003, and handed over the vehicle to the 1st respondent, who kept the same for 15 days and handed over the same without rectifying the above said problems. Thereafter also the problems repeated and the same was reported to the 1st respondent and again handed over the vehicle, who kept the same again for 10 days and handed over without any job work details. Even after that, the problem subsisted and the same is due to the manufacturing defect of the motorcycle. Therefore, a legal notice was issued asking them to replace the motorcycle or to return the money, which did not yield any positive result, resulting the complaint.

(3.) The respondents/ opposite parties denying the allegations in the complaint opposed the complaint stating that there was no mechanical defect in the vehicle except some minor repairs, which would occur in any vehicle, that the complainant failed to avail the 2nd and 3rd free services, that on 24.7.2003 after the vehicle ran 11933 Kms., goodwill services were done by the respondents without any legal obligation, that for the notice issued a suitable reply was given and that the problems if any in the motorcycle must have occurred due to lack of care and negligence in not following the instructions in the Owners Manual, for which respondents cannot be blamed.