Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/136/2018

Chandrappa T. S/o Thimmappa - Complainant(s)

Versus

Honnassiri, Mahindra Unit of H.D. Motors - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.M.Mohankumar

16 Nov 2018

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:19/07/2018

DISPOSED      ON:16/11/2018

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

CC.NO:136/2018

 

DATED: 16^th NOVEMBER 2018

PRESENT: - SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH  : PRESIDENT                                          B.A., LL.B.,

SMT. JYOTHI RADHESH JEMBAGI

BSc.,MBA., DHA.,             : LADY MEMBER

 

……COMPLAINANT/S	Chandrappa T, S/o Thimmappa Kainadu Village, Hosadurga Taluk, Chitradurga District   Now at: Advocate and Agriculturist, civil judge & JMFC Court complexes, Hosadurga-577527, Hosadurga taluk, Chitradurga District.   (Rep by Sri.M. Mohan Kumar, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	Honnassiri, Mahindra Unit of H.D. Motors, No.68/3A, Maralur Village, Tubbiring Road, Tumkur-572105.   (ex-parte)

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH:   PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 for the relief to direct the OP to pay Rs.1,000/- per day from 24.05.2017 to 21.06.2018 for 387 days, in all a sum of Rs.3,87,000/-, in addition to that difference of diesel and petrol for anj amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and towards mental agony and cost of Rs.13,000/- in all a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with interest @ 12 % p.a  and to grant such other reliefs.

2.      The brief facts of the case of the above complainant are that, the complainant has purchased diesel car i.e., KUV 106 K4BS4 LMV diesel from the OP as per the advice given by the OP as the same is 4 + 1 capacity and also given fuel consumption.  By believing the words of the OP show room, on 24.05.2017 the complainant has purchased the above said vehicle by obtaining loan from the Mahindra Finance.  The OP has issued sales certificate in Form No.21 on 24.05.2017.  Thereafter, at the time of registration, the complainant has submitted records issued by the OP showroom for registration, then only, he came to know that, the LMV car delivered by the OP is a petrol fuel car instead of diesel fuel car as agreed by them.  The complainant has approached the OP showroom and told about the said facts.  But the OP has told evasive answer that, both the vehicle and engine adopted therein are one and the same, but the fuel is different that’s all and the OP show room people in order to use hushed-up the fault done by them to the complainant who is an innocent and not known about the vehicle.  Now the complainant came to know that the OP in order to make wrongful gain to themselves and to cause wrongful loss to the complainant have delivered the petrol vehicle instead of diesel vehicle as urged by the complainant.  The supply of petrol vehicle to the complainant instead of diesel vehicle, the complainant has suffered much hardship and the complainant has loosened his money towards the fuel to the said vehicle.  The complainant is an agriculturist.  The OP legally bound to fulfill the loss occurred to the complainant on every day due to running of the said vehicle delivered by the OP by giving false information to the complainant.  Moreover, at the time of delivering the petrol vehicle in favour of the complainant, the OP purposefully in order to make wrongful gain to himself and to cause wrongful loss to the complainant as delivered the patrol car against to diesel car.  The OP has collected petrol car price from the complainant.  The complainant wants diesel car and he approached the OP for purchasing diesel car but the OPs have supplied petrol car instead of diesel car.  The complainant has informed the same to the OP through legal notice dated 26.02.2018 and requested the OP to make arrangements to pay the said compensation by way of loss caused to him at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per day from the date of delivery of the vehicle i.e., from 24.05.2017 and also requested the OP to change the vehicle i.e., to deliver the diesel vehicle to the complainant as per the sale certificate dated 24.05.2017 within 8 days from the date of receipt of the notice and take back the present delivered petrol car.  In spite of service of legal notice, the OP failed to reply and make it silent and they never give any reply to the said notice and hence, prayed for allow the complaint.

3.  In spite of service of notice, the OP did not appear before this Forum and hence, placed ex-parte.

4.      Complainant himself has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-11 were got marked and closed his side.

 

5.      Arguments heard.

6.      Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaints are that;

 

(1)  Whether the complainant proves that the OP has delivered the patrol car instead of diesel car and committed deficiency of service and entitled for the reliefs as prayed for in the above complaint?

              (2) What order?

          7.      Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

          Point No.1:- Partly in Affirmative. 

          Point No.2:- As per final order.

REASONS

8.      It is the case of the complainant that, the complainant has approached the OP for purchasing of car i.e., KUV 106 K4 BS4 LMV Diesel.  The complainant has no experience with purchase of such cars and the OP has pressed and directed to the complainant to purchase diesel car.  The car capacity is 4 + 1.  As per the direction and advice made by the OP, the complainant has purchased the above said car on 24.05.2017 from the OP by obtaining the loan from Mahindra Finance at Chitradurga Branch.  Accordingly, the OP has delivered the petrol vehicle to the complainant instead of diesel vehicle and also issued sale certificate in Form No.21 on 24.05.2017 and as per the Form, it clearly shows that, the complainant has purchased the diesel car from the OP.  After that, the complainant knows that, the OP has supplied the patrol car instead of diesel car.  Then immediately the complainant has approached the OP and told them to take back the patrol car and supply diesel car as per the Form No.21.  The complainant has obtained loan from the Mahindra Finance, Mahindra Finance has also issued sale certificate to the complainant as well as to the OP.  In the said certificate it is mentioned as diesel car.  The complainant has issued legal notice to the OP for change of patrol car to diesel car.  After receiving the legal notice, the OP never given any reply or come forward to exchange the patrol car to diesel car to the complainant.  The complainant has stated in his complaint also in the argument that, he has suffered loss to the tune of Rs.1,000/- per day for supplying the patrol car by the OP.  The complainant is an agriculturist and Advocate, he is not having good income from the Agriculture and also Advocate profession and he is not capable to bear Rs.1,000/- every day.  As per the documents produced by the complainant, which clearly shows that the complainant has booked diesel car from the OP.  The Ex.A-1 produced by the complainant is the legal notice issued to the OP, but the OP has not taken any care after receiving the notice from the complainant.  Ex.A-2 is the registration certificate issued by the RTO, Chitradurga, in that Ex.A-2, it clearly mentioned as petrol car and Ex.A-3 is the Liberty General Insurance Ltd., in that also it is mentioned as patrol car.  No doubt the OP has supplied patrol car to the complainant instead of diesel car.  As per Ex.A-4 sales certificate issued by the Mahindra and Mahindra Finance Service Ltd., on 24.05.2017, the type of fuel used is diesel, it clearly shows that, the complainant intended to purchase diesel car by obtaining loan from the Mahindra and Mahindra Finance.  But as per the Ex.A-1 and A-2, the OP has supplied patrol car to the complainant.  Now the complainant has used the patrol car till today by spending more money towards the patrol, it clearly shows that, the OP has committed deficiency of service for supplying of patrol car instead of diesel car.

9.      We have gone through the entire documents filed by the complainant.   No doubt the complainant has purchased the KUV 106 K4 BS4 LMV Diesel vehicle from the OP.  As per the documents it clearly shows that, the complainant has intended to purchase the diesel car by obtaining loan from the Mahindra Finance.  Accordingly, the Mahindra Finance has issued DD to the OP for supplying diesel car KUV 106 K4 BS4 LMV to the complainant, but after receiving the DD from the Mahindra Finance, the OP has supplied the patrol car by investing heavy amount towards the patrol.  The complainant is an agriculturist and an Advocate.  According to the complainant, he is getting less income from agriculture and his Advocate profession, it is not able to pay the installment also now a days.  No doubt as per the Ex.A-1 to A-3, the OP has supplied patrol car instead of diesel car to the complainant.  Ex.A-6 invoice also clearly shows that the OP has issued invoice to the complainant wherein it has been mentioned as patrol vehicle.  The sales certificate issued by the OP to the RTO, Chitradurga shows that, the fuel used is diesel, but at the time of supplying the vehicle, the OP has supplied patrol car instead of diesel car which is a deficiency in service on the part of OP itself.  Ex.A-10, the Form No.20 shows that the fuel used in the engine is patrol.  All the documents supplied by the OP shows that the fuel used is patrol, which clearly shows that, the OP has supplied the patrol car to the complainant instead of diesel car.  But the complainant has booked the diesel car and not a patrol car.  As per the sales certificate issued by the OP itself i.e., Ex.A-4 clearly shows that, the complainant has booked the diesel car.  Hence, the OP has committed deficiency of service in supplying the patrol car instead of diesel car.  Hence, this Forum comes to the conclusion that, the complainant is entitled for the amount under the insurance policy.   Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.          

            10.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is partly allowed.

It is further ordered that the OP is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,93,500/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from 24.05.2017 till realization.

It is further ordered that, the OP is hereby directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards costs of this proceedings to the complainant. 

It is further ordered that, the OP is hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

 (This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 16/11/2018 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)         

 

 

                                     

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

PW-1:  Complainant by way of affidavit evidence.

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs:

-Nil-

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Legal notice dated 26.02.2018
02	Ex-A-2:-	R.C
03	Ex-A-3:-	Policy copy
04	Ex-A-4:-	Form 21
05	Ex.A-5:-	Form KMV 19
06	Ex.A-6:-	Invoice dated 24.05.2017
07	Ex.A-7:-	Tax Invoice dated 24.05.2017
08	Ex.A-8:-	Tax Invoice dated 24.05.2017
09	Ex.A-9:-	Agreement copy
10	Ex.A-10:-	Form 20
11	Ex.A-11:-	Tax Invoice dated 24.05.2017

 

Documents marked on behalf of OP:

-Nil-

 

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

Rhr**