CC No.905.2018

Filed on: 25.05.2018

Disposed on: 19.12.2018

BEFORE THE III ADDITIONAL BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

BENGALURU– 560 027.

DATED THIS THE 19^th DAY OF DECEMBER 2018

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.905/2018

PRESENT:

 Sri.  H.S.RAMAKRISHNA B.Sc., LL.B.

         PRESIDENT

                  Smt.L.MAMATHA, B.A., (Law), LL.B.

                       MEMBER

                                      V/S

ORDER

BY SMT.L.MAMATHA, MEMBER

1. This Complaint was filed by the Complainant on 25.05.2018 U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to pass an Order directing the Opposite Party to pay Rs.35,000/- for the damages to CAR, to pay Rs.35,000/- for the harassment and wasted time (half day leaves for 10-12 hearings), to pay interest at 12% p.a. from the date of closure till date of realization on Rs.70,000/-, to pay cost of proceedings approx.Rs.12000/- and to grant such other reliefs.

2.         The brief facts of the complaint as under:

In the complaint, the Complainant alleges that he has shifted his car Hyundai EON Sportz Reg.No.KA 53 MB 3942 via GC No.4482093 from Bangalore to Chandigarh on 28.6.2016 for Rs.15,000/- with DRS Group-Agarwal Packers and Movers aka DRS Dilip Road Line Pvt. Ltd., When he went to collect his car, he found his new condition car (only 2 years old) and unscratched was damaged at several places and the repair cost for same quoted by Hyundai service center is Rs.24,575/- on 7.8.2016. The Complainant submits that the behaviour of Agarwal Packers and Movers employees was very bad when he enquired them about damages and asked them to get it repaired. He had to go nearest police station to file Complaint against them. It’s after police interruption, they agreed to get it repaired from quality garage. The Complainant found the following issues when he received his car.

1) Paint damage at front bumper

2) Paint damage at back bumper

3) Paint damage at bottom frame of front passenger seat side metal body is visible

4) Paint damage at bottom frame and door of driver side

5) Big scratches at car bonnet

6) Scratches at side mirror and near fuel tank lid

7) Driver back support attachment not there-750/-

8) He was asked to fill half tank petrol, so he filled Rs.1100/- petrol.

When he received car only 49 KM, it was drove, but full petrol was taken out hardly any petrol was left in the car.

During collection of car, he was promised for full damage payment or repair by quality garage after intervention of local police. He followed up with Chandigarh Office concern person Mr.Pawan, he denied his claim request, saying his car was not insured. The Complainant does not know why he agreed for all payment while collecting the car, if this is the case, agarwal Packers and Movers has stopped responding to his emails and calls. Hence, this Complaint.

3.       Even though, notice was served on the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party fails to put their appearance, hence placed ex-parte. 

4.       In support of the complaint, the Complainant has filed his affidavit by way of evidence.  Heard Argument of the Complainant.

5.     The points that arise for consideration are:-

1. Whether the Complainant has proved the alleged deficiency in service by the Opposite Party?

2. If so, to what relief the Complainant is entitled?

6.    Our findings on the above points are:-

                   POINT (1):- Affirmative

                     POINT (2):- As per the final Order

REASONS

7. - On perusing the pleadings along with documents produced by the Complainant, it reveals that the Complainant has shifted his car Hyundai EON Sportz Reg.No.KA 53 MB 3942 via GC No.4482093 from Bangalore to Chandigarh on 28.6.2016 through the Opposite Party by paying Rs.15,000/-. This fact is supported by bill G.C.No.4482093. The Opposite Party delivered the car on 11.7.2016. To substantiate this, the Complainant field his affidavit. In his sworn testimony, he has reiterated the same and in support of his testimony, he produced copy of bill, copy of E-mail communication, copy of payment bill, copy of car repair estimate from Hyundai, copy of car photos, copy of police Complaint. By looking into these documents, it is clearly shows that the Complainant availed service of the Opposite Party for transporting his car from Bangalore to Chandigarh by paying charges of Rs.15,000/-. When the Complainant went to collect his car, he found that his good condition car was damaged at several places and the repair cost for same quoted by Hyundai service center is Rs.24,575/-. When the Complainant asked the Opposite Party to rectify the defect of the car, the Opposite Party has not bothered for the same. So, the Complainant went nearest police station to file Complaint against the Opposite Party. For that, the Opposite Party agreed to get it repaired from quality garage. During the collection of the car, the Opposite Party promised for full damage payment or repair. But when the Complainant followed up with Chandigarh office of the Opposite Party, the concerned person denied the claim request of the Complainant that his car was not insured. It is the duty of the Opposite Party to deliver the car with due care. The Complainant sent emails and calls. But the Opposite Party neither replied nor rectified the defects of the car. By all these, it is very clear that the Opposite Party failed to render good service to the Complainant. Therefore, from the evidence available on record, it clearly goes to show that the Opposite Party has neither rectified the damages of car nor fulfill the demand of the Complainant. Due to this, the Complainant suffered financial loss and mental agony. The Complainant repeatedly requesting the Opposite Party to rectify the damages of car, but the Opposite Party never responded for the same. The evidence of the Complainant remains unchallenged. If at all the Opposite Party rectified the damages of car or rendered good service to the Complainant, the Opposite Party ought to have produced relevant evidence. But there is no such evidence. Therefore, it is proper to accept the contention of the Complainant that the Opposite Party neither replied mails nor fulfill the demand of the Complainant. To disbelieve the version of the Complainant, nothing was on record. Inspite of repeated request, the Opposite Party never bothered to fulfill the demand of the Complainant. Thereby, this clearly shows that there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party. Hence, this point is held in the affirmative.

8. POINT NO.2:- In the result, for the foregoing reasons, we proceed to pass the following order:

ORDER

The complaint is allowed holding that there is deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party.

The Opposite Party is directed to refund a sum of Rs.15,000/- with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of payment till the date of realization.

The Opposite Party is directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the Complainant.

The Opposite Party is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as cost of this litigation to the Complainant.

The Opposite Party is directed to comply the order within 30 days from the date of this order.

Supply free copy of this order to both the parties. 

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Forum on this, 19^th day of December 2018)

        MEMBER                                                     PRESIDENT 

LIST OF WITNESSES AND DOCUMENTS

 Witness examined on behalf of the Complainant:

1. Ashish Kumar Singh., who being the Complainant has filed his affidavit.

 List of documents filed by the Complainant:

1. Copy of email communication
2. Copy of GC No.4482093 Bill
3. Copy of payment bill
4. Copy of CAR condition when picked up
5. Copy of CAR repair estimate from Hyundai
6. Copy of Police Complaint against Agarwal Packers

Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite Parties:

                                    Nil

List of documents filed by the Respondent:

                                    Nil

MEMBER                                                               PRESIDENT