Delhi

East Delhi

CC/82/2014

VANDANA - Complainant(s)

Versus

BAS ENGINEERING - Opp.Party(s)

05 Feb 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

C.C. NO. 82/14

 

Smt. Vandana Aggarwal

W/o Shri Piyush Aggarwal

1/6370, East Rohtash Nagar

Delhi – 110 032                                                          ….Complainant

 

Vs.    

 

1. M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd.

Through its Directors

A-2, Udyog Nagar Industrial Area

Rohtak Road, Delhi – 110 041

 

2. Honda Cars India Pvt. Ltd.

Through its Directors

409, Tower B, DLF Commercial Compled

Jasola, New Delhi – 110 025                   …Opponents

 

Date of Institution: 21.01.2014

Judgement Reserved on: 05.02.2019

Judgement Passed on: 08.02.2019

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By: Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

 

JUDGEMENT

            This complaint has been filed by Smt. Vandana Aggarwal against M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) and Honda Cars India Pvt. Ltd.  (OP-2) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with allegations of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. 

2.         The facts in brief are that complainant Smt. Vandana Aggarwal who wanted to have a Honda Brio VXMT-Non metallic car, was informed by   M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) that the car would cost a sum of    Rs. 5,76,502/- including ex-showroom price, free normal insurance, registration, handling charges, extended warranty and free LED television.  She was informed that a sum of Rs. 6,250/- was part of the cost of the car as authorized/charged by Honda Cars India Pvt. Ltd. (OP-2).  The complainant accordingly, made of a sum of Rs. 5,76,500/- to M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) who delivered the car duly registered to the complainant with invoice for Rs. 5,02,452/-, Debit Note dated 01.01.2001, for handling charges Rs. 6,250/-, registration charges Rs. 22,537/-, parking charges Rs. 4,000/-, smart card charges Rs. 420/- and number plate        Rs. 900/-, making a total of Rs. 34,107/-. 

            On enquiring about the difference of Rs. 39,943/- in payment and bill, M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) could not give any satisfactory reply and finally stated that the same were towards cost of insurance and LED television, thereby exposing the unfair trade practice of misleading the customers by gimmick of free insurance and free television.              The husband of the complainant wrote to M/s. Honda Cars India Pvt. Ltd. (OP-2) who justified the misleading unfair trade practice adopted by M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1). 

            During the exchange of emails between the complainant and M/s. Honda Cars India Pvt. Ltd. (OP-2), M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) delivered to the complainant a debit note no. 13928 dated 20.11.2013 for a sum of Rs. 41,608/- showing Rs. 5,650/- for extended warranty,                Rs. 14,958/- for insurance and Rs. 21,000/- for LED television.  Out of these, LED television as well as insurance, were promised to be free and the OPs adopted unfair trade practice by charging the complainant for these items.  Thus, it has been stated that OPs have charged the complainant for services never opted/sought by the complainant.

            M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) have adopted unfair trade practice by binding the complainant to purchase the LED television, charging for insurance promised to be free and charging for handling etc. not authorized by M/s. Honda Cars Pvt. Ltd. (OP-2).  Thus, the complainant have prayed for refund of Rs. 42,208/- and charges for polishing and hypothecation alongwith 24% interest from 17.11.2013; Rs. 1,00,000/- compensation for harassment, tension and agony and cost of litigation.

3.         In the reply filed on behalf of M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1), it has been stated that at the time of negotiation, it was informed that an offer of free gifts worth Rs. 41,608/- which includes extended warranty of Rs. 5,650/-, insurance of Rs. 14,958/- and LED television of Rs. 21,000/- was available on purchase with the said car.  The total sale price of the vehicle including registration  charges, number plate, handling charges, parking and smart card was Rs. 5,76,500/-.  As a promotion, free bees worth Rs. 41,608/- were being offered.  The complainant paid                  Rs. 5,76,500/- only as per his own admission.  However, for accounting purposes, M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) prepared the bill by reducing the price of the car and raising the debit notes/invoices for the free bees.  Thus, no loss or damage or inconvenience was caused to the complainant. 

The complainant had purchased the vehicle for a sum of                Rs. 5,76,500/- and the free gifts worth Rs. 41,608/- the invoice handed to the complainant clearly show costs of the vehicle ex-showroom was         Rs. 5,02,432/-.  The cost of the handling charges was Rs. 6,250/-, registration was Rs. 22,537/-, parking charges Rs. 4,000/-, smart card charges Rs. 420/- and cost of number plate was Rs. 900/- making a total of Rs. 5,78,147/-, but the complainant paid an amount of Rs. 5,76,500/-.The debit notes for an amount of Rs. 34,107/- and Rs. 41,608/- were issued to the complainant for her satisfaction. 

It was stated that value of the vehicle was of Rs. 5,76,500/-, but for accounting purposes, value of the gifts have been shown adjusted in the value of the car, infact M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) has issued the debit notes in excess of Rs. 1,647/- which the complainant did not pay.  They have issued one debit note no. 13928 of Rs. 41,608/- instead of      Rs. 39,943/- which means note was issued in excess to the complainant which the complainant has to pay, but as a goodwill gesture, the said amount was not demanded by M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1).  They have denied any unfair trade practice of misleading the customers by gimmick of free insurance and free LED television.  They have denied other facts also.

In the reply filed on behalf of M/s. Honda Cars India Pvt. Ltd. (OP-2), they have stated that complainant have failed to disclose any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice qua OP-2.  Any grievance with respect to deficiency in service/unfair trade practice in respect of providing free insurance cover, free LED television, handling charges and polishing charges cannot be made against OP-2 as these charges were concerned OP-2 does not provide the same nor had ever made any representation for providing the same to the public at large.  These charges pertain to the ancillary service relating to the sale of the vehicle and were exclusively and independently provided by M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) based upon their own marketing strategy and initiatives.  There was no privity of contract between M/s. Honda Cars India Pvt. Ltd. (OP-2) and M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) were on a principal to principal basis.  They have denied other facts also.

4.        The complainant has filed rejoinder to the WS of M/s. Honda Cars India Pvt. Ltd. (OP-2), wherein she has controverted the pleas taken in the WS and reasserted her pleas.  
5. n support of its case, the complainant have examined herself.  She has deposed on affidavit reiterating the contents of the complaint. She has got exhibited documents such as copy of invoice for Rs. 5,02,452/- (Annex. C-1), debit note dated 01.01.2001(Annex. C-2), copy of retail order form (Annex. C-3), letter written to OP-2 dated 19.12.2013 (Annex. C-4) and copy of debit note no. 13928 dated 20.11.2013 (Annex. C-5).

M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) have examined Shri J.S. Harit, Assistant Manager (Legal) who have also deposed on affidavit and have reiterated the contents of the written statement.He has got exhibited board resolution dated 31.03.2014 as Ex.OP-1/1.

M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) have examined Shri Amit Sinha, Manager (Legal) who have deposed on affidavit and have narrated the facts which have been stated in the written statement.He has also got exhibited documents such as certified copy of letter of authority dated 08.01.2014 (Ex.OP-2/1) and copy of agreement with OP-1 (Ex.OP-2/2).

5.         We have heard Ld. Counsel for the parties and have perused the material placed on record.  It has been argued on behalf of complainant that M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) have promised LED television and insurance to be free for which they have charged an amount of         Rs. 21,000/- and Rs. 14,958/- respectively. 

            On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1)  have argued that no promise was made for these items to be free, but on the contrary, the amount of these items was to be adjusted against the cost of the vehicle which was reduced.

            To ascertain as to whether the complainant was promised to have these items free, a look has to be made to the documents placed on record by the complainant.  If the retail invoice exhibit Annex. C-1 is looked into, it is noticed that the total price of the vehicle has been shown as Rs. 5,02,452/- after discount.  The complainant have been issued debit note for an amount of Rs. 41,608/- which have been claimed by the complainant for insurance and LED television as promised free.  However, if this debit note is looked into, it is noticed that in the said debit note, an amount of Rs. 5,650/- have been shown for extended warranty.  The complainant have stated that promise was made for insurance and LED television free, but he has claimed the amount of Rs. 41,608/- which includes the extended warranty.  There is nothing on record to show that any promise was made on behalf of M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1).

            If the documents on record are perused, it is noticed that the amount for which the bills have been issued by M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) were for an amount of Rs. 5,78,167/- and the complainant have paid an amount of Rs. 5,76,500/- leaving a balance of Rs. 1,667/- which they have not claimed.  Thus, the fact remains that by reducing the price of the vehicle as per retail invoice, they were to adjust the amount by issuing the debit note.  Therefore, it cannot be said that there has been any deficiency on the part of M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1). 

When there has been no deficiency on the part of M/s. BAS Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) , the question of any deficiency on the part of M/s. Honda Cars India Pvt. Ltd. (OP-2) does not arise.  Thus, the complaint of the complainant deserves its dismissal and the same is dismissed.  There is no order as to cost.

            Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

            File be consigned to Record Room.

 

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                              (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

       Member                                                                             Member 

  

            (SUKHDEV SINGH)

                   President