D.O.F. 11.03.2010
D.O.O. 30.09.2011
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KANNUR
Present: Sri.K.Gopalan : President
Smt. K.P.Preethakumari: Member
Smt.M.D.Jessy : Member
Dated this the 30th day of September, 2011.
C.C.No.84/2010
M. Ram Mohan,
‘Supriya’
Thalai Road, : Complainant
Tellicherry – 670 102
(Rep. by Adv. M.V. Somasundaran)
1. The General Manager,
K.T.C Hyundai,
NH 17, Kanothumchal,
P.O. Chovva, Kannur – 670 012 : Opposite Parties
(Rep. by Adv. E. Mohammed Shafi)
2. Hyundai Motors India Limited,
A-30 Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate,
Madhura Road, New Delhi - 110044
(Rep. by Adv. M. Kishore Kumar)
O R D E R
Sri. K. Gopalan, President.
This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite party to pay ` 15,000 with interest and ` 10,000 as compensation together with the cost of litigation.
The case in brief of the complainant is thus : The complainant purchased from 1st opposite party a Hyundai I10 car during September, 2008. At the time of purchase there were offers viz. gold coin, exchange bonus of ` 15,000 for the standard vehicle and mates and flaps. Third item received at the time of delivery of vehicle and gold coin three months thereafter, on repeated reminders. But exchange bonus has not been given and on all enquiry the only answer was “under consideration”. After a lapse of one year complainant sent a letter on 14.09.2009. Reminders also sent on 7/10, 11/11 and 7/12 it. On the 3rd letter a reply was received with negative answer. Since the offer deliberately denied there is no other way except this complaint.
Pursuant to the notice opposite parties entered appearance and filed version. The brief facts of the contentions of 1st opposite party is as follows: Complainant has purchased a New I 10 Hyundai car. But it is false to say that there were few offers as alleged by complainant. There was an offer for exchange bonus. But there are certain conditions to be complied by the customer to avail the benefit for the exchange bonus offer. The customer should have owned a car and the old car is to be transferred within 105 days of purchasing new car. And there should be proper submission of documents viz new vehicle invoice copy signed by the customer, old vehicle RC copy and old vehicle RC copy after transfer to the new car within 110 days from the date of invoice. In the above matter, the complainant send a letter dated 07.10.09 stating that the true copies of the RC book of his exchanged car and true copies of R.C. of new Hyundayi I10 and true copies of sale deed was submitted on 06.10.2009. Complainant submitted the document only after 1 year. On 16.12.2009 opposite party sent a reply stating that the complainant is not entitled to exchange bonus offer as there is some defects in the R.C. particulars produced by the complainant at the time of purchase of new car. This was informed then and there and also informed him if the complainant is willing he can purchase the new car without any exchange bonus offer. It is agreed by complainant and purchased the car without bonus offer. The opposite party cannot give the offer, as the complainant’s purchase is not in accordance with the exchange bonus offer. The address furnished by the complainant and the address in the R.C. book were not tallying. Noting this defect complainant agreed to purchase new car without exchange offer. He is not entitled for exchange bonus since no valid documents were submitted within 110 days. Such condition was imposed to enable the opposite party to get approval of Hyundai Motors India Ltd after verification and approval of submitted documents. This opposite party has nothing to do with the belated submission of documents and improper submission of papers. After the expiry of said period it can be allowed only by the manufactures HMIL. Hence to dismiss the complaint.
2nd opposite party filed version contending that complainant was never entitled for the exchange bonus. The answering opposite party have never received any documents for Exchange Bonus claim of the complainant. The address given in the R.C. of old car and the address provided by the complainant was different and due to this complainant was not entitled for the exchange bonus. It was intimated to complainant that due to this defect, the complainant cannot avail benefit of the scheme of Exchange Bonus and complainant had purchased the car without availing the offer of Exchange Bonus Scheme. Complainants prayer is wrong and frivolous and deserves to be rejected.
On the above pleading the following issues have been taken for consideration.
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the remedy as prayed in the complaint?
3. Relief and cost.
The evidence consists of the oral evidence of PW1 and Ext.A1 to A15 marked on the side of the complainant. Opposite party has no oral evidence except Ext.B1 and B2 marked on the side of opposite parties through PW1.
Issues 1 to 3 :
Admittedly complainant purchased a new I10 Hyundai car. The case of the complainant is that at the time of purchase there were several offers viz. gold coin, Exchange Bonus of `15,000 for the old vehicle and mats + flaps. Third item received with delivery and gold coin after three months on constant reminders but did not provide Exchange Bonus.
Opposite parties on the other hand contended that complainant is not entitled for exchange bonus. The purchase was not in accordance with Exchange Bonus Scheme. The address furnished by the complainant and the address on the R.C. book of the old car were not tallying. Knowing this defect complainant purchased vehicle without exchange offer. Though he is supposed to submit documents within 110 days as per the contributions, he only submitted the documents after one year. After the expiry of stipulated days it is left with the prerogative of manufactures.
Complainant filed chief affidavit in tune with his pleadings. He adduced evidence that opposite party denied Exchange Bonus offer of ` 15,000 at the time of purchase of new car by disposing old car as per the offer. Ext.A1 dated 19.09.08 by the booking order form signed by sales consultant of 1st opposite party quite clearly noted separately gold coin, ` 15,000 Exchange Bonus and Mat and flaps and thus the offer stands proved. This document has not been challenged by opposite parties. Opposite party has no case that complainant was not having old car. Complainant adduced evidence that he has handed over his old car to 1st opposite party with RC and other relevant documents at the time of purchase of new car on 19.09.2008. The pleading of the complainant that gift of gold coin and mats and flaps given to complainant is not challenged by the opposite party. Among the items of gift Exchange Bonus offer of ` 15,000 alone remains to be given. If rest of the items had been given what is the justification for not giving the Exchange Bonus offers is a question first of all opposite parties bound to answer.
The opposite party contended that complainant is not entitled for the exchange bonus offer as there is some defects in R.C. book. The defect is that the address furnished by the complainant at the time of purchasing the new car and address in the R.C.book were not tallying. It is interesting to note that opposite party has no case that the complainant is not the owner of the alleged car. Ext.A3 is the copy of the R.C. book of old car. It shows the vehicle is in the name of the complainant. It was his official address given in the R.C. Book. Ext.A1 and Ext.A3 advertisement clearly makes it ascertain that there was offer as alleged. But there is no such condition seen imposed that the address in the R.C. of old car and the address furnishing for the new car should be one and the same. It is quite natural that the official address of a person need not necessarily be remained the same for ever. Ext.B2 reveals the owner of the vehicle is complainant Ram Mohan and it contain his official address. Even then no such condition imposed anywhere. Opposite party did not came forward and adduce evidence to establish his contentions. So the contention of opposite party that the address is not same and this defect is sufficient to deny the offer, has no substance. Even in the version opposite party did not say where the conditions are written. No document to this effect has been produced by opposite party in order to substantiate their contentions. Opposite party further contended that complainant was agreed to purchase the new car without any bonus offer. But no evidence adduced by opposite party to prove that complainant had purchased the car with such agreement. Ext.A1 and A13 undoubtedly prove that there was Exchange Bonus offer of ` 15,000. Then the burden lies up on the shoulders of opposite parties to prove that complainant purchased the vehicle without Exchange Bonus Offer. Opposite parties did not come forward to adduce evidence. Another contention raised by opposite party is that the relevant documents submitted later and that too improper. There is no evidence to know that complainant was instructed or informed by any means to produce the documents on such and such date and the manner in which it has to be produced.
Ext.A9 reply sent by 1st opposite party to complainant as a reminder-II dated 07.12.2009 informed complainant that the company cannot give the offer and the reason stated was only that the address furnished by him and the address in the RC book was not tallying. This is the main reason for rejection of Exchange Bonus and all other reasons are subsequent inventions in order to strengthen the case of opposite parties. If there was any other reason in connection with the violation of condition, the letter of opposite party dated 16.12.2002 (Ext.A9) would have been covered those items also.
Since opposite party has no case that the alleged complainant was not the original owner of the alleged old car, the change of address cannot be considered as a valid ground to reject the Exchange Bonus offer until and unless the said address is proved to be of some one else other than that of complainant. Ext.A1 and A13 makes it sure that the offer is apparently made on the part of 1st opposite party. 1st opposite party though insisted to implead 2nd opposite party as party they have not adduced any evidence to make 2nd opposite party liable for the offer made by 1st opposite party.
In the light of the above discussion we hold that there is deficiency in service on the part of 1st opposite party and they are liable to give Exchange Bonus offer ` 15,000 to complainant. 1st opposite party is also liable to pay compensation a sum of ` 1500 together with the cost of this litigation ` 1000. Thus the issues 1 to 3 are found in favour of complainant and order passed accordingly.
In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing 1st opposite party to pay ` 15,000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) as Exchange Bonus offer together with ` 1500 (Rupees One thousand five hundred only) as compensation and a sum of ` 1000 (Rupees One thousand only) as cost of this litigation, within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is entitled to execute the order as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
President Member Member
APPENDIX
Exhibits for the Complainant
A1. Booking order form dated 19.09.08.
A2. Copy of agreement dated 24.09.08.
A3. Copy of R.C. dated 15.03.1996.
A4. Copy of R.C. of new vehicle KL 58B1248.
A5. Letter dated 14.09.09.
A6. Copy of letter dated 07.10.09.
A7. Remainder dated 11.11.09.
A8. (a) Copy of remainder dated 07.12.09.
(b) Postal receipt.
A9. Letter in reply for remainder dated 16.12.09.
A10. Copy of reply.
A11. Copy of letters dated 17.02.10 (3 in numbers).
A12. Leaflet showing the address of OP2 dated 10.10.07.
A13. News paper advertisement dated 06.09.08.
A14. Postal receipts dated 14.09.09 (3 in numbers).
A15. Postal receipts (2 in numbers).
Exhibits for the opposite party
B1. Copy of the policy schedule issued to complainant.
B2. Registration particulars.
Witness examined for the complainant
PW1. Complainant
Witness examined for the opposite party
Nil
/forwarded by order/
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
