Haryana

Bhiwani

CC/204/2023

Susma - Complainant(s)

Versus

MRM HONDA - Opp.Party(s)

Arvind Dahiya

05 Apr 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHIWANI.

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.     204 of 2023

                                    DATE OF INSTITUTION:                 20.07.2023

                                                DATE OF ORDER:                            05.04.2024

 

Smt. Sushma wife of Sh. Mahesh, R/o Sector 13 HUDA, Bhiwani Tehsil and District Bhiwani.

 

            ……Complainant.

 

Versus

 

1. M.R.M. Autos (P) Ltd. Near Gaushala Meham Road, Bhiwani.

 

2. HDB Financial Services, Head Office: Herbal Estate near Bank of Baroda, Hisar.

 

3. HDB Financial Services, Hansi Road Near Adarsh College Bhiwani, Tehsil and District Bhiwani through its Branch Manager.

 

….. Opposite Parties

 

COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT, 2019.

 

 

BEFORE:        Mrs. Saroj Bala Bohra, Presiding Member.

Ms. Shashi Kiran Panwar, Member.

 

Present:-         Sh. Arvind Dahiya, Advocate for complainant.

                        OPs exparte.

 

ORDER:

 

Shashi Kiran Panwar, Member.

 

1.                     Brief facts of the present complaint are that complainant purchased an Activa Scooty from OP No.1 in a sum of Rs.70,000/-, out of this amount Rs.21,000/- was given in cash and remaining amount was financed from OPs No.2 & 3 through OP No.1. Complainant has stated that Rs.48,113/- alongwith interest  was to be paid by her to the OPs No.2 & 3 in 30 installments.  As per complainant, she has paid Rs.57,046/- with the OP financier whereas liability was to pay Rs.48,113/-. So complainant approached OPs but they did not pay any heed to her genuine requests and rather threatened the complainant to seize her vehicle as she had to pay Rs.77,790/- for the scooty. Complainant has alleged that due to the act & conduct of OPs, she has to suffer loss of about Rs.30,000/- in her business. Hence, the present complaint has been preferred by complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs resulting into monetary loss as well as mental and physical harassment.  In the end, sought for directions against the OPs, not to take away the vehicle from complainant and to pay Rs.2.00 lacs towards compensation for harassment besides Rs.1000/- as litigation expenses.

2.                     Notices were sent to the OPs. OPs No.1 & 3 did not bother to appear, as such, they were proceeded against as exparte vide order dated 29.08.2023. OP No.2 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 16.11.2023.

3.                     In exparte evidence of complainant, her affidavit Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Ex. C-1 to Ex. C-5 were tendered and closed the evidence.

4.                     We have heard learned counsel for complainant and perused the record carefully.

5.                     Complainant in order to substantiate his version that she purchased the scooty from OP No.1 has placed on record bill dated 13.04.2021 for Rs.69,113/- (Ex. C-1).  The grievance of complainant is that the OPs No.2 & 3 has received more money from her than the liability against financed amount. To prove this version, complainant has placed on record loan account statement pertaining to the vehicle of complainant (Ex. C-3) whereby it is revealed that complainant has paid 21 successful installments of Rs.2593/- each. Thus the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.54,453/- through installments and Rs.21,000/- allegedly paid at the time of purchase of the scooty, as such, the complainant has paid a total sum of Rs.75,453/- with the OP financier. Further, to strengthen her case, complainant has also filed her duly sworn in affidavit Ex. CW1/A which corroborates the version of complaint. Further, as per pleadings, complainant had to pay Rs.70,000/- in total towards the payment of scooty including loan liability. In view of the documents referred above as well as the fact that the evidence so produced by complainant remained unrebutted and unchallenged since the OPs remained abstain from proceedings of the case.  From the record, it emerges that the complainant has paid more than the agreed amount.  Further, the OPs are negligent, deficient in providing proper services to the complainant as well as has committed the act of unfair trade practice for which complainant has to fall into this unwarranted litigation. In such a situation, complainant must have suffered monetary loss as well as mental and physical harassment. Accordingly, the complaint is allowed and OPs No.2  & 3, jointly and severally, are directed to comply with the following directions within 40 days from the date of passing of this order:-

(i)        To refund Rs.5453/- (Rs.Five thousand four hundred fifty three) to the complainant alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint till actual realization.

(ii)       To pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) to the complainant as compensation for harassment.

(iii)      Also to pay a sum of Rs.55,00/- (Rs.Five thousand five hundred) as litigation expenses.

                         In case of non-compliance, the OP shall liable to pay simple interest @ 12% per annum on all the aforesaid awarded amounts for the period of default.  Further complainant shall be entitled to the execution petition under section 71 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and in that eventuality, the opposite party may also be liable for prosecution under Section 72 of the said Act which envisages punishment of imprisonment, which may extend to three years or fine upto rupees one lac or with both.  Certified copies of this order be sent to parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.              

Announced.

Dated:05.04.2024.