Consumer Forum rules in favour of Honda car buyer
All three parties have been ordered to pay Rs 10,000 each as compensation towards the mental and physical agony and costs of consumer’s complaint.
Pune: The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune has flayed car manufacturing company Honda for deficiency in service by the manufacturer and dealers for a four-wheeler.
Vallabh Natu, a resident of Shaniwar Peth, purchased a car, Honda Brio VMT, on March 13, 2013, from the authorised dealer, Bafna Auto Cars, Dhanakwadi.
Natu said the sales executive of the authorised dealer said that the manufacturers will provide alloy wheels for the car.
However, after the delivery of the car, the complainant noticed that the spare wheel provided together with the car was a steel-rim wheel and not alloy wheel.
The car brochure also clearly mentioned that all wheels provided along with the vehicle will be alloy wheels.
The forum ordered the opposite parties to replace the steel rim spare-wheel of the complainant’s car with an alloy wheel. All three parties have been ordered to pay Rs 10,000 each as compensation towards mental and physical agony and costs of consumer’s complaint.
Natu said he wrote several emails to the dealer which went unanswered. Finally, when he approached them, they behaved rudely saying all cars have this type of wheels. “If I have three high-end wheels and one below standard wheel in my mark, it’s obviously going to trash down the look of my car. And since I am paying for it, why can’t I question their interrupted service,” said Natu.
Natu filed a case on March 3, 2014, against three parties - Honda Cars India Ltd, Mumbai zonal office, Honda Cars India Ltd, factory, Greater Noida and the authorised dealer Bafna Auto Cars India Ltd in Pune.
All opposite parties straight away denied the contents as regards deficiency in service.
After hearing both the parties, the forum announced its verdict in favour of Natu on August 22, 2017. According to the forum, it was crystal clear from the brochure that the opposite parties agreed to supply alloy wheels with the car. “It appears from the attitude exhibited by the opposite parties that they have no common sense. The consumer is paying his hard earned money, hence he has all rights to get satisfaction. Not only mechanism but also the look of the car is very material from the consumer’s point of view,” the verdict said.