By Sri. Mohamed Ismayil C.V., Member.
The averments of the complainant are in brief:-
1. The complainant had made payment of Rs. 9,999/- to the opposite parties as advance to book a Revolt 400 Black Bike. Consequently, the opposite parties had issued a booking ID of RV22K6097/- to him. It was assured by the opposite parties that vehicle would be delivered within 45 to 90 days. Subsequent to that, the complainant had arranged Rs.1,54,000/- by way of loan believing the words of the opposite parties that they could deliver vehicle little bit earlier than that of promised period. But the opposite parties were failed to deliver the vehicle as promised. Later the opposite parties had offered delivery of the bike at a higher price that would resulting additional liability of Rs. 25,000/- to him. The act of the opposite parties had caused mental agony, financial loss, time loss and hardship to the complainant. Hence the complainant prayed for directions to the opposite parties to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh only ) as compensation .
2. The complainant filed an interim application numbered as IA No. 806/23 to remove the manufacturer from the party array. The Commission allowed the application thereby name of the manufacturer deleted from the party array. The remaining opposite parties were appeared and submitted written version. The rank of the opposite parties were also changed as opposite parties first and second instead of second and third opposite parties.
3. The contested opposite parties denied allegations raised by the complainant. The opposite parties are authorized sales and service agency of the manufacturer of the vehicle owned by the complainant. The second opposite party did not involve in the alleged transaction and there is misjoinder unnecessary party in this proceedings. It is contended that booking of vehicle was done by the complainant directly with the manufacturer. It is stated that the first opposite party had made guidance to book the vehicle and receipt of booking was issued by the manufacturer. According to the opposite parties, the complainant did not bought the vehicle from the opposite parties. It is contended that there is no deficiency in service from the side of opposite parties.
4. The complainant has submitted proof affidavit in lieu of evidence. The documents produced by the complainant are marked as Ext. A1 series and Ext.A2. Ext. A1 series documents are the copies of whatsapp communication made between the complainant and the opposite parties. Ext.A2 document is the copy of sanction for temporary advance from Kerala Aided School Employees Provident Fund. There is no evidence from the side of the opposite parties as they were failed to submit proof affidavit to support contention made in the version. Hence it can be considered that there is no contra evidence against the pleadings of the complainant from the opposite parties.
5. Heard the complainant in detail. Perused documents and affidavit thoroughly and considered following points to adjudicate the matter.
i) Whether the acts of the opposite parties can be treated as deficiency in service?
ii) Relief and cost?
6. Point No.(i) &(ii)
The Commission is considering above points conjointly for the sake of convenience of scrutiny. It has come in evidence that the complainant had been approached the opposite parties and remitted Rs. 9,999/- as advance for purchasing Revolt RV 400 Cosmic Black bike. The complainant produced copies of whatsapp communication made with the opposite parties and the same are marked Ext.A1 series documents. Ext. A1 series documents would show that the opposite parties had agreed to handover the bike to the complainant as stated in the complaint. It is further evident from the facts and circumstances of the case that the opposite parties had made arrangement to book the vehicle. It is further evident that the opposite parties could not deliver the vehicle as promised by them. In the complaint, the complainant has prayed for refund of Rs. 9,999/- paid as advance. But during the proceedings before the Commission, the complainant submitted a written statement revealing that opposite parties have been refund Rs.9,999/- to him. The Commission find that delay was occurred in making delivery of the vehicle to the complainant. The opposite parties are also failed to point out nature of relationship with the manufacturer. The admitted fact is that the opposite parties are authorized dealer of the bike. It has come out in evidence that the complainant has been suffered mental agony due to the act of the opposite party. Hence the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to compensate for the suffering endured by the complainant. So the Commission find that the opposite parties are liable to pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as compensation for the deficient service committed towards him. The Commission also find that the opposite party had forced the complainant to adopt legal remedies to get redressed his grievance. Hence the opposite parties are liable to pay Rs.5,000/- to the complainant as cost of litigation. The Commission find that Ext.A2 document is not a cogent evidence to conclude that the complainant had been arranged loan for purchasing the vehicle from the opposite parties. The complainant has failed to prove alleged financial loss due to the deficient acts of the opposite parties. So the Commission is declined to consider pleadings of financial loss. On the basis of deliberation made above the Commission allow the complaint in the following manner:-
- The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thounsd only) to the complainant as compensation for sufferings of mental agony caused due the act of deficiency in service from the side of the opposite parties.
- The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) to the complainant as cost of litigation.
The opposite parties shall comply this order within 30 days from the date of this order otherwise entire amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order till the date of realisation.
Dated this 30th day of September, 2024.
MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN.C, MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL.C.V, MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant: Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant: Ext.A1 and A2
Ext.A1: Copies of wattsup communication made between the complainant and the
opposite parties.
Ext.A2: Copy of sanction for temporary advance from Kerala Aided School Employees
Provident Fund.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party: Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party: Nil
MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN.C, MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL.C.V, MEMBER
