Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/98/2018

Naveen Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Hyundai, Berkeley Hyundai - Opp.Party(s)

Ginnijeet Malhotra Adv. & Ramandeep Adv.

28 May 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/98/2018
Date of Institution	:	16/02/2018
Date of Decision	:	28/05/2019

 

Naveen Sharma S/o Sh. Suresh Kumar Sharma, VPO Chulkana, District Panipat, Haryana.

…..Complainant

V E R S U S

 

1.     Hyundai, Berkeley Hyundai (Berk Auto LLP) through its General Manager, Plot No.27, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh.

2.     Sh. Didar Singh, General Manager, Hyundai, Berkeley Hyundai (Berk Auto LLP), Plot No.27, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh.

3.     Sh. Harpreet Singh, Employee of Hyundai, Berkeley Hyundai, Plot No.27, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh.

……Opposite Parties

 

QUORUM:	SH.RATTAN SINGH THAKUR	PRESIDENT
	DR.S.K.SARDANA	MEMBER

                                                       

ARGUED BY	:	Sh.Gurpreet Singh, Counsel for Complainant.
	:	Sh.Sandeep Jasuja, Counsel for Opposite Parties.

 

PER DR.S.K.Sardana, member

1.         In brief, the Complainant wanted to buy a brand new i20 Hyundai car and thus, approached the Opposite Parties, where he was introduced to a representative of ICICI Bank for financing the vehicle. Per averments, the ICICI Bank financed the vehicle and paid Rs.3.8 lakhs directly to the Berkeley Hyundai and besides that, the Complainant paid Rs.2,60,000/-. The car was delivered to the Complainant on 11.01.2018. However, when the Complainant went to the Opposite Parties for getting the papers of the car, including the bills and receipt, he was asked to pay Rs.2700/- towards interest on account of delayed payment from ICICI Bank to Opposite Parties. Eventually, the Complainant got served a legal notice dated 10.02.2018 upon the Opposite Parties, pursuant whereof they scaled down the demand to Rs.1800/-. It has been alleged that the Complainant would have to pay penalty of Rs.200/- per day w.e.f. 11.02.2018 to the Registration Office, Samalkha, Panipat as he cannot get his car registered for want of documents. Hence, the complainant has brought this consumer complaint.
2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case.
3.         Opposite Parties contested the complaint and filed their joint reply, inter alia, admitting the basic facts of the case. It has been pleaded that the Complainant requested the Opposite Parties for delivery of the booked vehicle without the loan amount as the Complainant wanted the delivery of vehicle on 11.01.2018 as the said day as per him was very auspicious. Although the Opposite Parties were not supposed to deliver the vehicle without receiving the complete payment yet on the said request they got ready to deliver the vehicle. However, it was made absolutely clear that in case his loan is rejected for some reason, the Complainant shall pay the remaining amount himself and that if the loan is delayed more than 4 days from the date of delivery, the Complainant shall pay Rs.300/- per day as penal charges. It was also agreed that till the loan amount is not deposited and all the accounts are not cleared, the Opposite Parties shall not release the documents of the car as the said documents would be kept as security for payment/balance payment, if any. The Complainant even voluntarily executed written undertaking to pay Rs.300/- per day from the 4^th day onwards till the date of receiving the loan amount by Opposite Parties. The Complainant paid his share i.e. Rs.2,58,000/-, but did not deposit the financed amount within 4 days as promised and deposited the sanctioned loan amount of Rs.2,97,090/- only on 23.01.2018. The Complainant was asked to deposit the late payment charges as agreed to be paid by him vide undertaking Annexure R-1/2 and only Rs.1800/- were demanded by the concerned official. However, the Complainant instead of honouring his written commitment to pay the said amount and get the documents released, filed the present Complaint by concealing the material facts. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part, Opposite Parties have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4.         Controverting the allegations contained in the reply of Opposite Parties and reiterating the pleadings in the Complaint, the Complainant filed the rejoinder.
5.         The parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
6.         We have gone through the entire record and have also heard the arguments addressed by the Ld. Counsel for the Parties.
7.         The grievance of the Complainant is that after the delivery of the subject car, the Opposite Parties refused to deliver its documents, until an amount of Rs.2700/- was paid to them by the Complainant, on account of interest on the delayed payment of the loan amount from the ICICI Bank.
8.         We have scanned the entire record available on the file and find that only part amount was paid by the Complainant to the Opposite Parties at the time of delivery of the car and financed the rest of the amount from the ICICI Bank. There was a delay of few days in sanctioning of loan amount by the ICICI Bank due to non- production of certain documents by the Complainant. In support of their claim, the Opposite Parties relied on the undertaking (Annexure R-1/2). We have minutely perused the said undertaking and found that the Opposite Parties were justified in demanding the disputed amount from the Complainant, as the Complainant himself had undertaken to pay panel charges of Rs.300/- per day from the 4^th day onwards till the payment is received from Bank/Finance Company. Hence, in our opinion, no case is made out against Opposite Parties and the present Complaint qua them deserves to be dismissed. 
9.         For the reasons recorded above, we do not find even a shred of evidence to prove any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Parties. Consequently, the Consumer Complaint fails and the same is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
10.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-		Sd/-
28/05/2019	[Dr.S.K.Sardana]		[Rattan Singh Thakur]
	Member		President
“Dutt”