- M/s Bhavishwa Real Estate Ltd.
A.C. Mansion (5th Floor), Bentick Street,
Kolkata-1, represented by
Dr. Alok Kumar Poi. _________ Complainant
____Versus____
- Maruti Suzuki,
Regional Office: L & T Chambers,
4th Flooor, 16, Camac Street,
Kolkakta-16, P.S. Park Street.
- Maruti Suzuki,
Head Office: Plot No.1, Nelson
Mandella Road, Vasant Kunj,
New Delhi 110 070.
- M/s Premier Car (Pvt.) Ltd.
Represented by its Branch Manager,
92F, B.T. Road, Kolkata-58.
- HDFC Bank Ltd.
Gillander House Branch,
14, Netaji Subhas Road, Kolkata-1. ________ Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, Hon’ble President
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member
Order No. 14 Dated 29-09-2014.
The case of the complainant in short is that complainant made an agreement with o.p. to purchase a cara model Dzire vide chassis no.124794 under several installments according to the norms and terms and conditions of o.p. car agency. Complainant states that an amount of Rs.10,000/- has been made to o.p. no.26.11.11 by SBI cheque for the demised car to the complainant.
Complainant states that several requests have been made from the end of the complainant to deliver he demised car which is binding obligation on the part of o.p. authority / car agency. Complainant states that recently o.p. appraised to the complainant interalia that present market price value of the demised car is being sought for by o.p. Complainant also states that for loan of the demised car, the financial institution namely HDFC Bank, N.S. Road Branch, Kolkata which is the sponsor of loan for the vehicle / car in favour of the complainant and the aforesaid bank is still giving installment payment in cash to o.p. as monthly despite the o.p. authority. Complainant further states that o.p. failed to deliver the demised car to the complainant though there is valid agreement between the parties.
Finding no other alternative the complainant made a legal notice on 4.8.12 to o.p. requesting delivery of the demised car to the complainant and o.p. did not delivery / handover the vehicle to the complainant at all which is flagrant violation of the terms and conditions of the agreement dt.26.11.11 for delivery of the car. Hence, the case was filed by the complainant with the prayers contained in the petition of complaint.
Decision with reasons:
O.ps. did not contest the case by filing w/v and the matter was heard ex parte against the o.ps.
We have gone through the entire materials on record and we find that complainant in their evidence has substantiated their claim and there is no reason to disbelieve the same and the evidence adduced by complainant has remained unchallenged testimony and not rebutted by o.ps. It is also clear from the record that non delivery of the car in question happens to be the cause of action of the complainant and complainant sent a legal notice on 4.8.12.
In view of the above findings we are of the view that complainant has made out the prima facie case and has been able to substantiate and prove their case and is entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the case is allowed ex pare with cost against the o.ps. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to deliver the car in question on receipt of dues due to their credit, if any, and are further directed to pay to the complainant compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
