CC: 233/2021
Date of Filing: 18.02.2021
Date of Disposal: 29.05.2023
BEFORE THE III ADDITIONAL BANGALORE URBAN
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
BENGALURU – 560 027.
DATED THIS THE 29th DAY OF MAY 2023
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 233/2021
PRESENT:
-
SRI.RAJU K.S,
SMT.REKHA SAYANNAVAR,:MEMBER
Smt. Nidhi Nair,
Aged about 23 years,
C-501, SJR Spencer,
Aswath Nagar, Marathahalli,
Rep. by GPA Holder
Mr. M. Prakash Nair,
Aged about 61 years,
C-501, SJR Spencer,
Aswath Nagar, Marathahalli,
(Rep. by Sri. Mohan Malge, Advocate) … COMPLAINANT
1)Managing Director,
Elite Vehicles Pvt.Ltd.,
(Authorized Ford Dealer)
Durga Waves, 186/26, 26A
Narayanapura, Mahadevapura,
Bangalore-560016.
(Rep. by Sri. Yaseen Babu, Advocate)
2)Managing Director,
Ford India Pvt.Ltd.,
(Vehicle Manufacturer),
S.P.Koli Post,
Chengalpattu,
Tamil Nadu-603204.
Ex-parte ... OPPOSITE PARTIES
//JUDGEMENT//
BY SMT. REKHA SAYANNAVAR, MEMBER
- The present complaint is filed under section 35 of CP Act 2019 with a prayer to direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to replace the vehicle with a new car of the same make and model with all the expenses related to its Insurance & RTO Registration etc. Alternatively direct the opposite parties to refund the entire amount of the car Rs.10,41,500/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of payment till realization. Further direct the opposite party to pay the differentiate amount sum of Rs.18,000/- paid towards Insurance. And to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- towards mental agony and pay legal expenses of RS.5000/- and Rs.400/- paid towards filing this complaint and to grant such other relief as this commission deems fit in the interest of justice and equity.
Brief facts of the complaint.
2. The complainant is represented by GPA Holder. Who purchased the subject vehicle Ford Ecosport 1.5 PET Trend Bearing No. KA 01 MV 1083 from Opposite party No.1 who is an authorized dealer of Ford India Pvt.Ltd. Opposite party No.2 is the manufacturer of the Ford India Pvt Ltd.
- On 15th November 2020 the complainant had visited
opposite party No.1 showroom and booked the subject vehicle by making a payment of Rs.10,000/- as booking amount.The opposite party No.1 had promised to deliver the subject vehicle after the entire payment of Rs.10,41,500/-. On 28th November 2020,the complainant made the payment of Rs.7,37,000/- from finance directly to the opposite party No.1 and for remaining amount made the payment by issuinga cheque forRs.2,92,500/- . The opposite party No.1 delivered the subject vehicle on 4th December 2020. The complainant also claims that the opposite party No.1 had collected an amount ofRs.50,193/-towards Insurance.But in insurance invoice the premium amount was mentioned asRs.31,951/-.The complainant submits that the opposite party No.1 had given a discount of Rs.54,127/-towards the purchase of the said vehicle.
- complainant noticed and experienced problems in Car Air conditioner. Immediately on 5th December 2020 the complainant visited the opposite party No.1 showroom. The opposite party No.1 made repair of the subject vehicle. The opposite number No.1 had not issued any receipt for the repair done. It shows their deficiency of service and un-fair trade practices. Further the complainant sent one E-mail on 07.12.2020 to M/s. Ford India Customer Care regarding the issue with subject vehicle. On 22 December 2020 the Ford India Customer Care sent an E-mail reply to the complainant specifying the repair done in the car was offered complementary interior cleaning service as a gesture from the dealer. Further the complainant had also failed to file warranty registration form of the said vehicle. The complainant did not get any proper response from the opposite parties, she was constrained to issue legal notice on 21st December 2020. The notice was duly served. The opposite party did not respond to the said legal notice. The complainant left with No other alternatives to approach this commission for the redressal of his grievances under CP Act of 2019 for the deficiency of service and unfair trade practice of opposite parties. Hence this complaint.
5. The notice of this complaint was duly served upon the opposite parties. The opposite party No.2 remained absent, placed EX-parte. The counsels for the opposite party No.1 had filed detailed version, partly denied the averments made by the complainant. The counsel for the opposite party No.1 contended that the subject vehicle had been tested, inspected and delivered to the complainant and the same is acknowledged by the complainant by signing the document at the time of the delivery on 4th December 2020. Hence, there is no deficiency of services and unfair trade practices from the side of the opposite party No.1 as claimed by the complainant and prayed to dismiss the complaint with cost.
6. The counsel for the complainant had filed affidavit in the form of evidence in chief of GPA Holder of Complainant. EX-P1 to Ex-P13 are marked. The counsel for the opposite party No.1 filed affidavit in the form of their evidence in chief. EX-R1 to R24 are marked.
7. Opposite party No.1 had filed written arguments.
8. The points that would arise for consideration are as under:-
(1) Whether there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties ?
(2) Whether the complainant is entitle for the
relief as sought ?
(3) What order ?
9. Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:
POINT NO.1 : In Affirmative.
POINT NO.2 : Partly in Affirmative.
POINT NO.3 : As per the final order for the following;
REASONS
10. To avoid the repetition of facts, we have discussed both points together. The PW1 and RW1 had reiterated the facts. The complainant is represented by GPA holder One Shri M. Prakash Nair and the original GPA copy is marked as Exhibit P9. It is the case of the complainant, who had claimed mainly for the replacement of the subject vehicle and differentiate amount of the insurance and compensation and litigation charges. On perusal of the documents, it appears that the complainant had purchased the subject vehicle on 28.11.2020 by paying the amount of Rs.10,41,500/- from OP number 1,who is the dealer of the vehicle and the OP number 2 is the manufacture of the subject vehicle.
11. However, this being the facts of the case, the complainant had started experiencing problems in air-conditioner of the subject vehicle. Immediately she approached the OP number 1 and OP number 1 had rectified the issue and the AC got started. The point is to be noted here is that the OP Number No.1 did not issue any job card for this repair work done. The complainant even after this repair work kept on experiencing problems in air conditioner and which would off and restart automatically and a foul fuel smell emitting inside the car cabin. The complainant had sent an email to Ford India customer care on 17 December 2020 Exhibit P11 regarding the above mentioned issues. The complainant received a reply email i.e EX.P11 on 22 December 2020 from Ford India customer care specifying the repair done in the car and offered complimentary interior cleaning services without any cost as a gesture from the dealership. The complainant further stated that the dealer has also failed to fill the warranty registration form of the vehicle. The another claim of the complainant which is differentiate amount of the insurance. On perusal of the Exhibit P5. i.e the copy of the insurance, the policy premium paid was Rs,31,969/-. Whereas on perusal of the Proforma invoice i.e Exhibit P4 the insurance amount was mentioned Rs,50,193/-. Hence there is a diffierentiate of amount of RS.18,224/-.
12. The notice of this complaint was duly served upon the OP No.2, remained absent, placed Ex-parte, who is the manufacturer of the subject vehicle. The counsel for opposite party No.1 had filed detailed version along with documents and written arguments. On perusal of Ex. R2, it is evident that the vehicle was tested at the time of the delivery and moreover the complainant had put her signature on Delivery Check List, RTO process etc. documents and had also signed the instant feedback form and given score 9 (good) for the service provided by the opposite party No.1. EX.R13 . The opposite party No.1 being the dealer of the subject vehicle had rectified the air conditioning issue when it is brought to it and the Ford India Customer Care Center reply e-mail dated 30th January 2021, to the complainant and stated that the said repair of the AC was done as the gesture support from the dealer, and have offered interior cleaning without any cost to the complainant and denied any manufacturing defect. The complainant earlier made a prayer for Replacement of subject vehicle, later filed an amendment application seeking to add ‘‘ Direction to Opposite parties to refund the entire amount of Rs. 10,41,500/- with interest at the rate of 18% from the date of payment ’’. The point to be noted here is that to prove any manufacturing defect the complainant ought to have produced `` the opinion the expert ``. Here, the complainant had filed the IA seeking for to appoint the Expert to verify the subject vehicle on 06.11.2021 and the counsel for op no 1 had strongly objected for it. Later on 07.06.2022 the complainant submitted that she got repaired the A.C. of the vehicle through 3rd party and now she does not want to press the present application for inspection of the subject vehicle in the light of the submission made the said application is dismissed as not pressed on 07.06.2022. The claim of the complainant for the replacement of the subject vehicle with a new one in the absence of expert opinion cannot be maintainable And justiciable . Hence, we feel the complainant failed to prove the manufacturing defect of the subject Vehicle as claimed. Due to the acts of the opposite party No.1 complainant had experienced mental agony and financial hardship as she purchased the subject vehicle with many expectations and happiness with her hard earned money. Hence, the Opposite parties are liable to pay the differentiate amount of Rs.18,224/- of the Insurance policy of the subject vehicle with interest at the rate of 9 % from the date of amount paid for insurance i.e. 28.11.2020 as per EX.P1. To substantiate this claim the complainant has produced EX.P5 i.e copy of the Insurance. In addition, the Opposite Party No.1 is liable to pay the compensation of Rs.5,000/-to the complainant towards mental agony and financial hardship and to pay Rs.10,000/- towards the cost of the litigation. Hence, we answer point number one in affirmative and point number two in partly affirmative
POINT NO.3 :- In the result, for the foregoing reasons, we proceed to pass the following.
ORDER
The complaint is allowed in part.
The Opposite party No.1 is liable to pay the differentiate amount of Rs.18,224/- of the Insurance policy of the subject vehicle with interest at the rate of 9 % from 28..11.2020 till realization.
In addition to the complainant is entitled for compensation of Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and financial hardship and RS.10,000/- towards cost of the litigation from opposite party No.1.
Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.
Opposite party No.1 shall comply the order within 30 days. In case, if it fails to comply the order within the said period, the above said amount of Rs.15,000/- carries interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order till realization.
Applications pending, if any, stands disposed off in terms of the aforesaid judgment.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by her, the transcript corrected, revised and then pronounced in the open commission on 29th day of May 2023).
- REKHA SAYANNAVAR) (RAJU K.S) (SHIVARAMA. K)
-
//ANNEXURE//
Witness examined for the complainant side:
Sri.M. Prakash Nair GPA Holder of Complainant has filed his affidavit in the form of his evidence in chief.
Documents marked for the complainant side:
1.Copy o Tax Invoice No.SV-MSR-20-135 dt. 28.11.2020 EX.P1
2.Copy of SBI cheque of complainant dt. 15.11.2020 EX.P2
3.Another cheque bearing No.683901 EX.P3
4.Copy of Proforma Invoice dt. 20.11.2020 EX.P4
5.Copy of Insurance Policy No.OG-21-1701-1825-002041 EX.P5
6.Copy of RC Book Regn.No.KA-01-MV 1083 EX.P6
7.Copy of arrangement letter dt. 24.11.2020 EX.P7
8. Legal Notice dt. 19.12.2020 EX.P8
9. Original GPA dt. 03.02.2021 EX.P9
10.Certificate U/s 65 (B) of Indian Evidence Act. EX.P10.
11.Mail Communication between Complainant and Opposite Party
- sheets). EX.P111
12. 1st free service coupon. EX.P12.
13.2nd free service coupon. EX.P13.
Witness examined for the opposite parties side:
Documents marked for the Opposite Parties side:
1.Authorisation letter dt. 21.9.2021. Ex.R1
2.Copy of delivery coordinator cheque list (6 sheets). EX.R2
3.Copy of the Audit cheque list dt.4.12.2020 (2 sheets).EX.R3
4.Copy of Employee ID Card of complainant. EX.R4
5.Copy of salary slip of complainant. EX.R5
6.Copy of `To whomit may concern`.EX.R6
7.Copy of Proforma dt.20.11.2020 EX.R7
8.Copy of vehicle pricing form EX.R8
9.Copy of sales contract dt.15.11.2020 EX.R9
10.Copy of sales summary bearing No.421 EX.R10
11.Copy of the satisfaction note dt.4.12.2020.EX.R11
12.CopyofBajajInsurance policy No.OG-21-1701-1825-00241 EX.R12
13.Copy of Feedback(2 sheets) EX.R13
14.Copy of the Pre-delivery instruction dt.01.12.2020 EX.R14
15.Copy of Tax Invoice dt. 28.11.2020 (4 sheets) EX.R15
16.Copy of Sanction letter dt. 24.11.2020 EX.R16
17.Copy of Tax Invoice dt. 20.11.2020 (Repair order) EX.R17
18. Copy of Order booking Form No.393520. EX.R18
19. Copy of Bank receipt-sales voucher d. 17.11.2020 EX.R19
20. Copy of Bank receipt-sales voucher dt.25.11.2020 EX.R20
21. Copy of RTO Challan dt, 1.12.2020 EX.R21
22. Copy of fast tag details dt. 28.11.2020 EX.R22
23. Copy of Customer report dt. 27.11.2020 (4 sheets) EX.R23
24. Copy of declaration by Company or by Customer dealer
code No.38420 EX.R24
- REKHA SAYANNAVAR) (RAJU K.S) (SHIVARAMA. K)
-
ORDER
The complaint is allowed in part.
The Opposite party No.1 is liable to pay the differentiate amount of Rs.18,224/- of the Insurance policy of the subject vehicle with interest at the rate of 9 % from 28..11.2020 till realization.
In addition to the complainant is entitled for compensation of Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and financial hardship and Rs.10,000/- towards cost of the litigation from opposite party No.1.
Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.
Opposite party No.1 shall comply the order within 30 days. In case, if it fails to comply the order within the said period, the above said amount of Rs.15,000/- carries interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order till realization
Applications pending, if any, stands disposed off in terms of the aforesaid judgment.
(Pronounced in the open commission on 29th day of May 2023).
- REKHA SAYANNAVAR) (RAJU K.S) (SHIVARAMA. K)
-
