Kerala

StateCommission

A/09/346

Koyenco Autos Pvt. Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

A.K.Abdul Rahman Haji - Opp.Party(s)

S.Reghu Kumar

17 May 2010

ORDER

First Appeal No. A/09/346
(Arisen out of Order Dated 06/05/2009 in Case No. CC 03/07 of District Kasaragod)
1. Koyenco Autos Pvt. Ltd.Kerala ...........Appellant(s)

Versus
1. A.K.Abdul Rahman HajiKerala ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE :
HONORABLE JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU PRESIDENT
PRESENT :

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

APPEAL 346/09

JUDGMENT DATED: 17.5.2010

 

 

PRESENT

JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU            : PRESIDENT

SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA                        : MEMBER

 

1.The Manager,                                            : APPELLANTS

    Koyenco Autos Pvt. Ltd.,

    Koyenco House, West Hill,

    Calicut.

2. The Manager,

     Koyenco Autos Pvt. Ltd.,

     Kannur Branch, Abana Complex,

     Pallukunnu, Kannuar.

 

(By Adv.S.Reghukumar)

 

        Vs.

A.K.Abdulrahiman Haji,                               : RESPONDENT

S/o Kunhimahinkutty Haji,

Residing at Malige Valappil House,

P.O.Adhur, Mulleria, Kasaragod.

 

(By Adv.R.S.Kalkura)

 

JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU  : PRESIDENT

 

 

The appellants are the opposite parties  in CC.3/07 in the file of CDRF, Kasargod.

2. It is the case of the complainant is that he paid for  a superior model Indica DLG car but was supplied with a low    priced model  ie. Indica DLS car.  He has sought for the  price difference ie, Rs.17000/-.

3. The case of the opposite parties is that although the complainant booked DLG model but at the time of  purchase he opted DLS model and a sum of Rs. 3690/- the difference  was offered to be paid.  But the complainant refused to accept the same.

4. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of  PW1 and DW1; Exts.A1 to A7 and B1 to B6.

5. The case of the opposite parties/appellants   is that accessories worth Rs.14,000/- was also given.  The complainant has denied the same.  It is seen from the price list produced by the opposite parties that the price of the DLG model is Rs.3,71,347/- and that the DLS model car is Rs.3,53,610/. The discount offered is Rs.14000/- is not disputed.   As per the copy of the DD produced the complainant has paid an amount of  Rs.3,57,900/- with which if the discount amount of Rs.14000/- is added the  amount would work out to Rs.3,71,347/-.  We find that the above aspect clinches the issue.  The opposite parties have offered Rs.3690/-. The price difference between the 2 models after discount would work out to Rs.17000/-.  In the circumstances we find that there is no bonafides in the case set up by the appellant.  We find there is no scope for the interference in the order of the Forum.

In the result the appeal is dismissed.  Office is directed to forward the LCR to the Forum along with the copy of this order.

 

 

JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU            : PRESIDENT

 

 

SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA                        : MEMBER

 

 

 

ps

 

PRONOUNCED :
Dated : 17 May 2010

[HONORABLE JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU]PRESIDENT