DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NORTH-WEST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
CC No: 116/2019
D.No.__________________ Date: ________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
SHAILENDER KUMAR JAIN,
S/o LATE SH. MEHAR CHAND JAIN,
R/o 52, BHARAT APARTMENT,
SECTOR-13, ROHINI, DELHI-110085.… COMPLAINANT
Versus
HEMKUND HYUNDAI,
THROUGH ITS VICE PRESIDENT,
B-99, WAZIR PUR INDL. AREA,
INDL. AREA ROAD, POCKET- C- 3,
PHASE-2, ASHOK VIHAR, DELHI-110052. … OPPOSITE PARTY
CORAM:SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 07.02.2019
Date of decision: 15.11.2019
SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
ORDER
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against OPunderSection 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 thereby allegingthat the complainant booked a Hyundai i20 Magna Car in Red Colour from OP by giving booking amount of Rs.2,00,000/- on 09.12.2018 and OP is an authorized automobile dealer and a unit of Sikka Motors Pvt. Ltd. Thereafter, On-Road-Price was fixed at
CC No. 116/2019 Page 1 of 8
Rs.5,80,000/- for which OP took valid documents from the complainant for the approval of loan from State Bank of India of Rs.3,80,000/- and the delivery of the said car was promised in between 25 to 30 December-2018. The complainant further alleged that OP without informing or taking the permission of the complainant forwarded the documents to State Bank of India for the approval of loan of Rs.5,00,000/- and the invoice has a statement that says that OP can make any changes without notice and upon asking OP told that this was not that case and if it was true then to no one would book the car. The complainant further alleged that the complainant was facing difficulty in travelling for work and e-mailed OP on 29.12.2018 requesting the delivery of the car and requested to deliver the car in Star Dust Grey Colour if the colour Red is not available in the said car. The complainant further alleged that the complainant visited OP on 07/08.01.2019 where Ms. Jyotsana, Sales Manager told the complainant that the i20 Magna Model was not available now and so OP did not deliver the car on time and she also toldthe complainant that he would not has to pay any increased price due to OP’s inability to deliver the car, when the complainant asked for the same in written then Ms. Jyotsana told that the complainant has previous written invoice that is valid and that the On-Road-Price will remain the same. The complainant further alleged that the complainant repeatedly visited
CC No. 116/2019 Page 2 of 8
and called OP and finally met Mr. Manish Suri, Vice President Sales on 10.01.2019 and Mr. Manish Suri with Ms. Jyotsana and promised OP to deliver the new model of car at the same On-Road-Price as mentioned in the invoice and he told that there was no need to give it in writing and further told the complainant to trust OP. Thereafter, the complainant called Mr. Manish Suri after 7-8 days and Mr. Manish Suri told the complainant to pay Rs.78,000/- approx. extra for the delivery of the car and the complainant requested that he had booked the car according to his budget and even after the On-Road-Price increase, the difference in the new and old price was Rs.3,908/- which Mr. Manish Suri denied to accept on behalf of OP. The complainant further alleged that the complainant realized that he got trapped by OP and wrote an e-mail on 24.01.2019 and the complainant visited OP on 27.01.2019 and Mr. Manish Suri was not in India and the staff gathered near the complainant and misbehaved and the complainant again e-mailed OP on 01.02.2019 regarding breach and non-delivery of the car to which OP did not reply and the complainant was mentally, socially, physically, economically and financially harassed and again e-mailed OP on 02.02.2019 regarding customer harassment and Mr. Manish Suri on behalf of OP replied the e-mail and demanded the increased price. The complainant further alleged that the complainant had booked the car according to his budget and would
CC No. 116/2019 Page 3 of 8
have been able to book another better car if he had increased his budget and has suffered a loss and there is deficiency in serviceand unfair trade practice on the part of OP.
2. On these allegations the complainant has filed the present complaint with a prayer to direct OP to deliver the car i20 Magna (at the On-Road-Price at the time of booking and if required Rs.3,906/- extra as per the calculation as well as compensation of Rs.2 lakh for causing mental agony, harassment and OP be further directed to compensate the complainant for the work travelling expenses incurred by the complainant and has also sought Rs.15,000/- towards cost of litigation.
3. OP has been contesting the case and filed written statement and submitted that the complaintis not maintainable and same is liable to be dismissed. OP further submitted that the complainant wants to take undue advantage of his own wrong as the complainant booked the car in Red Colour on 09.12.2018 but due to non-availability of Red car in manufacturing company, he was offered to take the car in other colour but he was adamant on Red Colour only and now car of same model has come in the market with new features and with a hiked cost price but the complainant now demands either of 2018 model of the new model at same price. OP further submitted that the car which was booked by the complainant was having ex-showroom price of Rs.6.25 Lakhs plus
CC No. 116/2019 Page 4 of 8
Road tax plus insurance charge plus handling charges plus HSRP charge but the price of the car was settled at Rs.5,80,000/- after deducting the price of his old car, exchange bonus and other deductions/discounts under the scheme of that period so that maximum benefits could be given to the complainant.
4. The complainant filed rejoinder and denied the contentions of OP which has been taken in written statement by OP.
5. In order to prove his case, the complainant filed his evidence by way of affidavit and the complainant also filed written arguments. The complainant also filed copy of receipt no.32998 dated 09.12.2018 consultant name Sunny issued by OP regarding booking of the car of Rs.2,00,000/- through cheque 766466 drawn on Indian Overseas Bank, copy of receipt/schemes for finance/performa invoice dated 09.12.2018 issued by OP, copy of Order Booking Form dated 09.12.2018 issued by OP, copy of mobile message sent by OP to the complainant regarding Loan approval, copy of e-mail communication dated 29.12.2018 sent by the complainant to OP and reply dated 01.01.2019 sent by OP to the complainant , copy of Current On-Road-Price of car, copy of Pre-Owned Car Transaction Sheet issued by OP regarding payment instructions, copy of Price List of the cars issued by OP and copies of communications between the parties through e-mail. The complainant also filed copies pamphlet of OP in the month of February.
CC No. 116/2019 Page 5 of 8
6. On the other hand, on behalf of OP,Sh. Bipan Kumar Sharma,DGM, HR & Admin. of OP filed his affidavit in evidence which is as per lines of defence taken by OP in the written statement. OP also filed written arguments.
7. During the course of arguments, complainant filed following authorities/case laws which are as under:
i) In case entitled M/s Vikas Motors Ltd. Vs. Dr. P.K. Jain
decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 24.08.1999.
ii) II (1994) CPJ-1(SC) in case entitled Om Prakash Vs.Assistant Engineer, Haryana Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. &Anr. decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 12.04.1994.
iii) In case entitled Charan Singh Vs. Healing Touch Hospital &Ors. decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 20.09.2000.
8. We have heard submissions of the complainant and OP advanced at the bar and perused the record as well as written arguments of the parties.
9. This Forum has considered the case of the complainant in the light of evidence of both the parties and documents placed on record by the complainant. The case of the complainant has remained consistent and undoubted and there is nothing on record todisbelieve the case of the complainant. From the documents placed on record by the complainant it is established that the complainant has booked Hyundai i20 vehicle Red Colour on 09.12.2018 and paid the booking amount of Rs.2,00,000/- by means of cheque which was cleared on 11.12.2018 and these facts are not disputed by OP.
CC No. 116/2019 Page 6 of 8
The complainant has also placed on record copy of price list issued by OP and also placed on record copy of communication through e-mail to OP and reply received from OP. If Hyundai i20 model vehicle of Red Colour was not available with OP then OP ought not to have booked the vehicle for the complainant. When the said vehicle was not available may be on the part of manufacturing company, the complainant cannot be burdened with the increase in price the next year. Failure on the part of OP to deliver the vehicle to the complainant amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
10. Thus, OP is held guilty of deficiency in service. Accordingly,OP is directed as under:
i) To pay/refund to the complainant to avoid further litigationan amount of Rs.2,00,000/- which was deposited as the booking amount alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. w.e.f. 11.12.2018 till the date of this order.
-
11. The above directions shall be complied by OP within 30 days from the date of receiving of this order failing which OP shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% per annum from
CC No. 116/2019 Page 7 of 8
the date of receiving of this order till the date of payment. If OP fails to comply with the order within 30 days from the date of receiving of this order, the complainant may approach this Forum u/s 25/27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
12. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of The Consumer Protection Regulations-2005. Therefore, file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 15th day of November, 2019.
BARIQ AHMED USHA KHANNA M.K. GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MEMBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC No. 116/2019 Page 8 of 8
