Haryana

Bhiwani

CC/171/2023

Kuldeep Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Deep Automobile - Opp.Party(s)

Om Parmar

30 Sep 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHIWANI.

 

                  Consumer Complaint No. : 171 of 2023

                  Date of Institution             : 18.07.2023

                                                           Date of Decision               :  30.09.2024

 

Kuldeep Singh son of Sh. Tek Ram R/o village Talu, Tehsil and District Bhiwani.

 

          ……Complainant.

 

Versus

 

Deep Automobiles, Rohtak Road, Near Bank Colony, Bhiwani, through its Manager/signatory authority.

 

….. Opposite Party

 

COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT, 2019.

 

BEFORE:     Mrs. Saroj Bala Bohra, Presiding Member.

Ms. Shashi Kiran Panwar, Member.

 

Present:-      Sh. Vimal Parmar, Advocate for complainant.

                    OP exparte.

 

ORDER

 

Shashi Kiran Panwar, Member.

 

1.                 Brief facts of the present complaint are that complainant owns a Maruti Ritz VDI Car bearing registration No. HR-16P-3110. It is submitted that engine of the said vehicle caught fire due to hit of the radiator, as a result of which front bumper, bumper holders, bumper lower grill, radiator spot, hose pipe, AC condenser assy etc. were got damaged. Complainant got his vehicle repaired from OP on 10.08.2021 and Rs.24,548/- was paid for it.  It is alleged that the radiator of the vehicle again got damaged again on 02.09.2021 due to which the radiator, AC, filter etc. of the vehicle got heated up and burnt but the OP refused to repair the vehicle. So, complainant had to repair the vehicle from market on which Rs.72,635/- was spent. Thus complainant has alleged that the loss occurred to him due to installation of leaking radiator. Legal notice dated 28.10.2021 was served upon the OP but of no avail. Hence, the present complaint has been preferred by complainant alleging deficiency in service resulting into monetary loss as well as mental and physical harassment. In the end, prayer has been made to direct the OP to refund the amount of Rs.24,548/- alongwith interest @ 24% interest. Also to return a sum of Rs.72,635/- for the work done from the market alongwith interest @ 24%. Further to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment besides Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses. Any other relief to which this Commission deems fit has also been sought.

2.                 OP did not appear despite issuance of registered notice, as such, it was proceeded against as exparte vide order dated 24.07.2024.

3.                 In evidence of complainant, his affidavit Ex. CW1/A alongwith documents Ex. C-1 to Ex. C-10 were tendered and closed the evidence on 02.09.2024.

4.                 We have heard learned counsel for complainant and perused the record minutely.

5.                 At the outset, perusal of copy of R.C. of the vehicle (Ex. C-1) reveals that complainant is owner of the vehicle in question and as per copy of driving license (Ex.C-2), he is authorized to drive the car. As per repair bill dated 10.08.2021 (Ex. C-3), complainant paid Rs.24,548/- towards repairs of the vehicle to the OP. Thereafter vide bills dated 09.09.2021 (Ex. C-4 & C-5), bill dated 10.09.2021 (Ex. C-10), bill dated (Ex. C-6) and bill dated 20.09.2021 ( Ex. C-7) complainant incur Rs.72,635/- on repairs of the vehicle. While going through the bill (Ex.C-1) and bills thereafter are for repair almost with the work of radiator etc. It is also worthwhile to mention here that complainant had to get the vehicle repair within a very short span of time i.e. on month which reveals that the OP had not carried out the work satisfactorily. To strengthen his case, complainant has filed his duly sworn affidavit Ex. CW1/A which corroborates the version of complaint.  In view of the documents referred above as well as the fact that OP did not defend its case as remained exparte from the proceedings despite issuance of notices.  In such a situation, we have no option except to believe the version of complainant. Accordingly, we are of the view that the OP was negligent, deficient in providing proper services to the complainant as well as has adopted unfair trade practice which dragged the complainant into this unwarranted litigation. Thus complainant must have suffered monetary loss as well as mental and physical harassment.  Accordingly, the complaint is allowed and OP is directed to comply with the following directions within 40 days from the date of passing of this order:-

(i)       To refund Rs.24,548/- (Rs. Twenty four thousand five hundred forty eight) to the complainant alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint till actual realization.

(ii)      To pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty thousand) to the complainant as compensation for harassment.

(iii)     Also to pay a sum of Rs.55,00/- (Rs.Five thousand five hundred) as litigation expenses.

                                                           

                    In case of default, the OP shall liable to pay simple interest @ 12% per annum on all the aforesaid awarded amounts for the period of default. The complaint is allowed accordingly.  If this order is not complied with, then the complainant shall be entitled to the execution petition under section 71 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and in that eventuality, the opposite party may also be liable for prosecution under Section 72 of the said Act which envisages punishment of imprisonment, which may extend to three years or fine upto rupees one lac or with both. Certified copies of this order be sent to parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.  

Announced.

Dated:30.09.2024.