I am going to file complaint against Hyundai motors in consumer forum on instructions of my client. the detail is given below:-

BEFORE THE LEARNED DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FEROZEPUR



Trishla Naryal aged years wife of Shri M.S. Naryal, R/o Naryal Homeo Clinic, Abohar-152116, Tehsil Abohar, District Fazilka, now at VPO: Sarol, Tehsil & District Chamba, HP. .. Complainant
Versus
(1) D.P. Hyundai, Hanumangarh-Malout Bye-pass, Near Sitto Chowk, Abohar, District Fazilka, Pb. through its partners/Owner
(2) Novelty Hyundai, Authorised Dealer of Hyundai Co. Dalhousie Road, Mamoon Cantt. Chowk, Pathankot, through its owner/Prop./partner/ Manager.
(3) Hyundai Motors India Ltd., Regd. Office and Factory : Plot No.H-1, Sipcot, Industrial Park, Irrungattukottai, Sri Perumbudur, Taluk, Kanchi Pur District, Tamilnadu-600117 through its M.D.
(4) Apollo Tyres Ltd., near Bus Stand, GT Road, Malout -152107, District Sri Muktsar Sahib through its owner/Manager/Prop./Partner
..Opposite parties
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF THE CONSUMER
PROTECTION ACT, 1986
- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sir,
Respectfully showeth,
1. That the opposite parties No.1&2 are the authorized Dealers of the opposite party No.3 Company and the opposite party No.3 is the manufacturers of vehicle Cars and the opposite party No.4 is the dealer of Apollo tyres.
-2-
2. That the complainant had purchased one i20 Magna (O) 1.4 DSL BSIV Coral White Car from the opposite party no. 1 on 15.06.2012 and the complainant paid the entire price of the same i.e. Rs. 6,62, 000/-. The engine No. of the said vehicle is D4FCCU125558, Chassis No.MALBB51RLCM429038*E, Model 2012. The said vehicle is now registered with the registration authorities vide Regn.No.PB-22E-3229. The copy of retail Invoice, Registration Certificate, Form-22 is attached herewith for kind perusal of this Hon’ble Forum.
3. That the said vehicle is manufactured by the opposite party No.3 and when the vehicle was delivered to the complainant, there were new tyres of Apollo brand.
4. That at the time of purchase, the opposite party No.1 told that the vehicle will be delivered with new tyres of Apollo good brand Co. which will have separate warranty and it was also represented that with running of 40000-50000 KMs there will no problem or wear or tear as far as the working of the tyres is concerned.
5. That the complainant and his husband who is Doctor (both are above 60 years of age) are using and driving the vehicle and the running is simple minimal and has just run 14500 KMs and being old age and professional persons and minimum use of the vehicle, the rough running of the vehicle cannot be expected from the complainant and his husband and further, with the running of just 14500 KMs, there cannot be any wearing out of tyres or any problem with the tyres of any kind.
6. That in the second week of May, 2013, the complainant was surprised to see that all the four tyres of vehicle has excessively rubbed out and the complainant herself adjudged without any doubt that the new tyres which were delivered with the vehicle were made
-3-
out of very inferior quality material otherwise there was no reason that in such a short period and that too with short running that the tyres would rub out excessively than it normally should have been. The complainant immediately approached the opposite party No.1 and explained the position and the opposite party No.1 was also surprised to note that it should have not happened keeping in view the period and mileage of running of vehicle and he asked the complainant to get checked the tyres from the opposite party No.4. On contacting, the opposite party No.4 came and checked the tyres and reported that “fast wear due to faulty breaking system.” The photos of vehicle and tyres are attached herewith for kind perusal of this Hon’ble Forum. The photo copy of report of opposite party no. 4 is also attached herewith.
7. That after receiving the above said report, the complainant again approached the opposite party No.1 that either the vehicle is of bad workmanship or the tyres of the vehicle are of inferior quality material and the complainant requested the opposite party No.1 to carry out the full checking and to rectify the problem in the vehicle and further give replacement of all the tyres with new tyres of good brand with good material, but the opposite party No.1 is lingering on the matter and yesterday refused.
8. That the complainant is getting the vehicle serviced regularly as per the service manual from the authorized service centre i.e. opposite party No.2. The copies of job sheet are attached herewith for kind perusal of this Forum.
9. That it is also pertinent to mention here that the vehicle met with an accident on 03.12.2012 due to heavy fog as the vehicle struck against the big stone lying on the road and the vehicle was got
-4-
repaired from the opposite party No.2. It is pertinent to mention here that even on 18.02.2013 when the vehicle was repaired and when the vehicle had run 10528, the opposite party No.2 reported that the rear tyres are worn out which shows that there is some defect either in the machine or in the tyres and the complainant is only concerned with the proper running of vehicle with good tyres.
10. That the opposite party No.3 is a Company commanding good reputation in India and abroad and they provide good quality products/vehicles and if there is any defect, the opposite party No.3 is expected and supposed to rectify the problem and to satisfy the customer through their network of dealership but the complainant has suffered harassment, mental agony, humiliation and financial losses and the complainant’s huge investment is also idle as the complainant is unable to use the vehicle. The complainant is ready to produce the vehicle and tyres for its checking.
11. That the action of the opposite parties tantamounts to deficiency in services and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties, as the complainant is entitled to be compensated.
12. That the cause of action arose to the complainant in favour of the opposite parties at Abohar where the opposite party No.1 is working and where the vehicle in question was purchased and the complainant is also residing at Tehsil Abohar, so this Hon’ble forum has got jurisdiction to entertain and dispose of this complaint.
13. That the complaint of the complainant is valued under Rs.1,00,000/-, so a Rs.100/- is being paid by way of IPO.

It is, therefore, prayed that the opposite parties may please be directed–
-5-
(a) to rectify the problem in the vehicle and to replace the tyres of brand Co. with good quality material with warranty/guarantee for reasonable period/to pay the amount towards the price of tyres.
(b) to compensate the complainant for harassment, humiliation mental agony, financial losses to the tune of Rs.50000/- with litigation expenses of Rs.11000/-.
(c) any other relief which this Hon’ble Forum deems proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Submitted by:

Trishla Naryal wife of Shri M.S. Naryal, R/o Naryal Homeo Clinic, Abohar-152116, Tehsil Abohar, District Fazilka, now at VPO: Sarol, Tehsil & District Chamba, HP. .. Complainant



Place: Abohar Through Counsel
Dated Parkash Makkar, Adv