A.K.ANNAMALAI, J. - (1.) The opposite party is the appellant.
(2.) Complainant filed a complaint against the opposite party praying for the relief for payment of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the deficiency of service in the supply of vehicle purchased by the complainant. The complainant purchased the TVS 50 XL Super from the opposite party on 14.8.2007 and after taking delivery of the vehicle he found that the vehicle was defective in giving the mileage and as per the direction of the opposite party the vehicle was taken to them for repair and after that repair once again the vehicle was not given any improved mileage and thereafter he entrusted the vehicle on 21.10.07 and after taking delivery when the vehicle was test driven the speedo meter was not working and as the spare was not available immediately the opposite party requested the complainant to come on 24.09.07 and when he approached on 24.09.2007 they have not properly responded and on 11.10.07 when he received the R.C.Book and insurance paper we found that the colour of the vehicle was mentioned as black instead of blue and when enquired it was informed that the RTO has committed the mistake and thereby the opposite party have not rectified the defects of the vehicle and speedo meter was also not fitted as on the date of complaint and thereby the complainant came forward with this complaint.
(3.) The opposite party denied the allegations of the complaint in the written version and it is stated that after the purchase of the vehicle from the opposite party on 22.09.2007 the opposite party had assisted in registration of vehicle in RTO office on 14.8.07 and had delivered the vehicle on 14.8.07 and for the purpose of registration sale certificate was issued. 10 days after taking of delivery the defects complained by the complainant in the vehicle were rectified and advised the complainant to drive the vehicle as per the instructions given in the manual and on the basis of pre-warranty service on 21.09.2007 he availed the service and for subsequent warranty dates he has not availed the same in spite of the reminders given and on 21.9.07 all the defects were attended and since the defective speedo meter could not be changed free of cost for want of ready stock. After 22.9.07 the complainant did not bring the vehicle till date for any service and on 12.10.07, when delivering the RC Book the complainant noticed the colour of the vehicle was wrongly mentioned which was the mistake committed by the RTO who issued the certificate and it was taken to the RTO?s office and duly necessary correction was made with authentication by the RTO office. But after receiving the photo copy of the same the complainant did not turn up to collect the corrected certificate. Hence there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the complaint is to be dismissed.;