DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II U.T. CHANDIGARH Complaint Case No.: 376 of 2009 Date of Inst: 19.03.2009 Date of Decision:06.10.2010 Dr.Y.P.Sood, s/o late Shri Chaman Lal r/o 1074, Sector 39-B, Chandigarh. ---Complainant V E R S U S 1. M/s Berkeley Automobiles Limited, 24 Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh. 2 Maruti Udyog Limited, SCO No.39-40, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh. ---Opposite Parties QUORUM SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT SHRI ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI MEMBER SMT.MADHU MUTNEJA MEMBER PRESENT: Sh.Gaurav Bhardwaj, Adv. for complainant Sh.Sandeep Jasuja, Adv. for OP-1. OP-2 exparte. --- PER LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT Dr.Y.P.Sood has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying therein that OPs be directed to:- i) Immediately stop the unfair trade practice of giving delivery of cars to the customers out of turn with intention to earn black money. ii) Produce the record relating to booking and delivery of Maruti Swift Dzire VDI Car (Arctic White Colour) from 08.04.2008 till 17.11.2008. iii) Pay a sum of Rs.1 lac as compensation for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. iv) Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses. 2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that on 08.04.2008, he booked a Maruti Swift Dzire VDI Car (Arctic White Colour) for a total basic price of Rs.5,93,167/- with M/s Berkeley Automobiles Ltd.(OP-1) who is authorized dealer of Maruti Udyog Ltd. (OP-2) by depositing Rs.50,000/- against receipt (Annexure C-1). The complainant was assured that the car would be delivered to him within the maximum period of 4 months from the date of its booking. According to the complainant, the delivery of the car was made to him 17.11.2008 for Rs.6,09,731/- and that too on his repeated visits. The complainant paid Rs.3,22,000/- vide cheque No.595496 dated 17.11.2008 and Rs.2,46,935/- in cash. It has been averred by the complainant that but in the invoice dated 17.11.2008, the date of booking was mentioned as 17.11.2008 instead of 08.04.2008 which shows the unfair trade practice adopted by OPs. According to the complainant, OPs are not following any procedure in supplying the vehicles and there are number of vehicles which have been received during this time and the same were delivered to the persons who have booked later on. It has further been pleaded by the complainant that on his protest, OPs have paid interest of Rs.3386/- on the booking of Rs.50000/-. The case of the complainant is that the act and conduct of OP-1 in giving the delivery of the car to the persons out of their turn with an intention to earn black money amounts to unfair trade practice. In these circumstances, the present complaint was filed seeking the reliefs mentioned above. 3. In the reply filed by OP-1, the fact with regard to the booking of the car has not been denied. It has been stated that the complainant was told that the delivery of the vehicle shall be subject to the supply of cars received of the particular colour chosen by him and the period is tentative and could increase or decrease later on. According to OP, the complainant has concealed the contents of letter dated 06.08.2008 whereby he was informed that due to production constraint, the delivery of the vehicle shall be delayed by 1-2 months and offered impressive interest @ 12% p.a. to the tune of Rs.3386/- on the booking amount of Rs.50,000/- which has been received by the complainant at the time of delivery of the vehicle. Hence, the complainant has now no cause of action to file the complaint qua it. In these circumstances, according to OP-1, there is no deficiency in service on its part and the complaint deserves dismissal. 4. OP-2 was duly served but nobody appeared on its behalf either in person or through counsel. Therefore, it was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 27.04.2009. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including documents, annexures, affidavits etc. 6. Admittedly the complainant booked the Maruti Swift Dzire VDI Car (Arctic White Colour) on 08.04.2008 and paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards the booking amount. He took the delivery of the said car on 17.11.2008 after paying the remaining amount. 7. The grouse of the complainant is that at the time of booking, he was told that the car would be made available to him within the maximum period of 4 months from the date of its booking whereas, in fact, the car was delivered to him after 7 months. The case of the OP is that the delay in delivery of the car is because of lesser production of cars of white colour. 8. It was argued by the learned counsel for the complainant that OPs are indulging in unfair trade practice by selling cars at higher rates to the persons who booked their cars later in time. An application was also moved by the learned counsel for the complainant for production of the record relating to the booking of the cars and delivery thereof. However, the same could not be placed on record as the relevant record was mis-placed at the time of shifting of the office. Thus, there is no material on record to prove that any car was sold to a person earlier to the complainant who had booked the car later in time. Otherwise also, an offer was given to the complainant for payment of interest from the date of depositing the booking amount till the delivery of the car and the complainant has accepted the said offer. In our view, once the complainant has already accepted the said offer of interest, he has no grouse to file the present complaint against OPs. 9. Hence, the complainant has failed to make out a case of deficiency in service against the OP. 10. In view of the above findings, this complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs. Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. Announced 06.10.2010 Sd/- (LAKSHMAN SHARMA) PRESIDENT cm sd/- (ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI) MEMBER Sd/- (MADHU MUTNEJA) MEMBER
C.C.No.376 of 2009 PRESENT: None. --- Arguments heard on 21.09.2010. The case was reserved for orders. As per separate detailed order of even date, this complaint is dismissed. After compliance file be consigned. Announced. 06.10.2010 Member President Member
| | MR. A.R BHANDARI, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT | MRS. MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER | | 
