BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.317 of 2014

Date of Instt. 12.09.2014

Date of Decision :03.09.2015

Partibha Sharma aged about 32 years wife of Munish Sharma R/o 19, G.F.Guru Amar Dass Nagar, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant Versus

M/s Goyal Automotive Limited, Kapurthala Road, Opp.Jalandhar Vihar, Jalandhar through its General Manager.

.........Opposite party.

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: S. Jaspal Singh Bhatia (President)

Ms. Jyotsna Thatai (Member)

Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Sh.Rajbir Singh Adv., counsel for complainant.

Sh.Vikas Sood Adv., counsel for opposite party.

Order

Jyotsna Thatai (Memer)

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, against the opposite party on the averments that the complainant purchased one car make Grand i10 Asta (O) 1-1 DLS BSIV (Sleek Silver) bearing chasis No.MALA851 BLEM088784, Engine No.D3FAEM080636 and having registration No.PB08CS3060 from the opposite party for a sum of Rs.6,48,150/- vide bill dated 11.4.2014 and she also paid a sum of Rs.5100/- for obtaining special registration number vide receipt No.1947 dated 29.3.2014 and a sum of Rs.32800/- vide receipt No.24 dated 11.4.2014 and a sum of Rs.5000/- vide receipt No.513 dated 9.5.2014, but at the time of applying the RC of the said car the opposite party supplied the bill for a sum of Rs.6,30,150/- and for RC a sum of Rs.33911/- but the opposite party has received a sum of Rs.6,48,150/- plus Rs.37400/- plus Rs.5000/- from the complainant, meaning thereby that the opposite party has received excess amount from the complainant instead of the actual amount. The opposite party has committed fraud with the complainant as the opposite party has received the excess amount than that of the actual amount from the complainant and further the opposite party failed to provide the special number of the said car for which the opposite party has received excess/extra amount from the complainant. In this manner the opposite party has provided deficient services to the complainant. On such like averments, the complainant has prayed for directing the opposite party to pay her the excess amount alongwith interest. She has also demanded compensation and litigation expenses.

2. Upon notice, opposite party appeared and filed a written reply raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability, suppression of material facts and that no extra charges have been raised or claimed. On merits, it pleaded that each and every amount is accounted for in the statement of account and it is incorrect that it has received any excess amount from the complainant. The complainant has purchased the car and other accessories and this amount is duly entered in the statement of account. It denied other material averments of the complainant.

3. In support of her complaint, learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CW/A alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C13 and closed evidence.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite parties has tendered affidavit Ex.OP/A alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP/1 to Ex.OP/8 and closed evidence.

5. We have carefully gone through the record and also heard the learned counsels for both the parties.

6. Counsel for the complainant contended that opposite party has received Rs.6,48,150/- vide bill dated 11.4.2014 regarding the purchase price of the car but it supplied the bill for sum of Rs.6,30,150/- and in this manner received Rs.18,000/- in excess. He further contended that the opposite party has received Rs.37800/- i.e Rs.32,800/- plus Rs.5000/- from the complainant for registration charges but actually it deposited Rs.33911/- and in this way received Rs.3889/- in excess. He further contended that opposite party has also received Rs.5100/- for special number but no special number was provided to her. He further contended that in this way the opposite party has received Rs.26989/- in excess from the complainant. On the other hand, it has been contended by learned counsel for the opposite party that whatever amount was received from the complainant is duly reflected in the statement of account and opposite party has not received any excess amount from the complainant. We have carefully considered the contentions advanced by learned counsel for both the parties. The complainant has produced on record retail invoice Ex.C6 for Rs.6,30,150/- supplied by the opposite party. Ex.OP8 is also retail invoice for Rs.6,30,150/- in favour of the complainant produced by the opposite party. Even in statement of account Ex.OP/1 produced by the opposite party against sale car Rs.6,30,150/- are mentioned. However, the opposite party received Rs.6,48,150/- from the complainant as sale price vide receipt Ex.C10. Ex.C1 is retail invoice of the car in question issued by the opposite party to the complainant wherein Rs.6,48,150/- are mentioned. In this retail invoice Ex.C1 Rs.4500/- are mentioned as other charges. Counsel for the opposite party has not explained the amount of Rs.4500/- charged on account of other charges. In the retail invoice Ex.C1 price of the car is mentioned as Rs.5,63,123/- but in retail invoice Ex.C6 the price of the car is mentioned as Rs.5,47,375/-. Counsel for the opposite party has failed to explain how there could be two invoices for the same car in favour of the same customer of the same date. So from retail invoice Ex.C1 and Ex.C6 it is evident that opposite party has charged Rs.18,000/- in excess from the complainant on account of price of the car. The opposite party also received Rs.32,800/- vide receipt dated 11.4.2014 Ex.C7 for registration charges and further Rs.5000/- vide receipt dated 9.5.2014 Ex.C9. So in this way, opposite party received Rs.37800/- on account of registration charges but as per statement of account Ex.OP4, the opposite party has deposited Rs.33911/- on account of registration charges. So in this way, opposite party received Rs.3889/- in excess on account of registration charges. The opposite party also received Rs.5100/- vide receipt dated 29.7.2014 for supplying special registration number. According to the complainant, no special number was provided to her. Counsel for the opposite party has also failed to show, if any special number was provided to the complainant. The opposite party has produced two statement of accounts in respect of the complainant. First statement of account is Ex.OP/1 and second statement of account is Ex.OP4. We fail to understand how there could be two statement of accounts regarding the same car. The very fact that there are two statement of accounts clearly shows that opposite party is not maintaining correct account and has not produced the correct statement of accounts. Statement of account Ex.OP4 is from 1.1.2001 to 31.3.2015. In this statement of account, the first entry is of 1.1.2001 showing opening balance of Rs.5100/-. We fail to understand as to how this entry in statement of account is relevant in the present case. The opening balance of Rs.5100/- as on 1.1.2001 can not be linked with the present case as the complainant has purchased the car in the year 2014. In this statement of account Rs.1050/- is shown as credit balance. This very fact shows that opposite party has charged excess amount from the complainant. In both the statement of accounts, an amount of Rs.8527/- is shown on account of sale price of accessories but none of the receipt produced by the complainant is relating to the above said amount of Rs.8527/-. In the statement of account under the head sale accessories account, invoice No.B201406164 dated 11.4.2014 is mentioned but in order to justify the entry, the opposite party has produced credit invoice Ex.OP6 of Rs.8527/-. The credit invoice means that the accessories were sold to the complainant on credit. It appears that the above said credit invoice has been prepared afterwards. Moreover, no value can be attached to the statement of account produced by the opposite party in respect of sale of the car in question to the complainant as both the statement of accounts are at variance. In the statement of account Ex.OP/1 credit of balance of Rs.1050/- is shown and whereas in statement of account Ex.OP/4 no credit balance is shown. Further in statement of account Ex.OP/1 against the entry of Rs.8527/- relating to sale accessories excise invoice number/voucher No.99 is mentioned and whereas in statement of account Ex.OP4 against this their entry excise invoice number/voucher No.106 is mentioned. So this fact clearly shows that opposite party has not produced correct statement of accounts. Consequently, version of the complainant is liable to be accepted. From the above discussed facts, it is clear that opposite party has received Rs.26989/- in excess from the complainant which it is liable to refund to her.

7. In view of above discussion, the present complaint is accepted and opposite party is directed to pay Rs.26989/- to the complainant alongwith Rs.10,000/- in lump sum on account of compensation and litigation expenses within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order failing which it shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum on the entire awarded amount after the expiry of said period of one month till the date of payment. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Jyotsna Thatai Jaspal Singh Bhatia

03.09.2015 Member Member President