Friday, 19th April 2024
To guardian.ng
Search

Court rules on suit against Dana motors over faulty Kia car

By Bertram Nwannekanma
07 May 2018   |   2:59 am
Magistrate Shokunbi of Isolo Magistrate Court, Lagos, has fixed May 11, for ruling on the suit brought by Lagos based-structural engineer, Victor Oyenuga, against Dana Motors Limited. Dispute arose when a brand new KIA Sorento car bought by the claimant in December 2009 allegedly developed fault barely four months after purchase from the defendant for…

Magistrate Shokunbi of Isolo Magistrate Court, Lagos, has fixed May 11, for ruling on the suit brought by Lagos based-structural engineer, Victor Oyenuga, against Dana Motors Limited.

Dispute arose when a brand new KIA Sorento car bought by the claimant in December 2009 allegedly developed fault barely four months after purchase from the defendant for N5.130 million.

The claimant averred that he was surprised that the said car with Chassis No: KNAJC525896677 and engine N0: G6DB8H042746 had been developing fault four months after its purchase with the kilometer reading of 1,165 and has since been undergoing series of repairs.

It was also the contention of the claimant that the car could not be repaired any more since there has not been any positive result so far despite repeated repairs.

The claimant further stated that he is a good car maintainer and had bought a Toyota Corolla in March 2003, which he used for ten years covering about 228,000 kilometres before there was any engine issue.

Oyenuga is claiming the sum of N5 million as general damages for the pains caused him and N1 million as professional fees to his solicitor. Alternatively, the claimant is directing the defendant to refund the sum of N5.1 million being the price of the said car and sum of N165,000 being the amount expended on repairing it.

But Dana in its defense, stated that the claims of the claimant are unmeritorious, frivolous and should be dismissed.

The defence contended that the claimant’s action is not one for debt or liquidated money demand and should not be subject to a summary summons procedure.

It also denied that the claimant is entitled to be compensated with a new car or its money equivalent, stressing that the car is out of warranty period.

According to Dana, by 2014 when the complaint of bad alternator was made, the claimant had used the car for upwards of five years, by which time the claimant’s warranty had expired necessitating the payment of N189,000 required for replacement, labour and services.

In this article

0 Comments