BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KAPURTHALA.
Complaint No. 05 of 2021
Date of Instt. 12.01.2021
Date of Decision :27.11.2024
Sital Singh son of Gurnam Singh r/o Village Sandhar Jagir, P.O. Khallu, Tehsil and District Kapurthala.
..........Complainant
Versus
M/s Goyal Automotive (P) Ltd, GT Road, Paragpur, Opp Big Bazar Jalandhar through its Authorized Signatory.
.........Opposite party
Complaint Under Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Before: Sh. Rajesh Bhatia (President)
S. Kanwar Jaswant Singh (Member)
Present: Sh. R.K. Anand, Adv. Counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Jatinder Sharma counsel for OP.
Order
Sh. Rajesh Bhatia (President)
1. The complainant has preferred this complaint under Consumer Protection Act. As per version of complainant, complainant is the owner of Car vehicle bearing No. PB 09 Y 3029 and unfortunately the said car met with an accident on 22/7/2020 which resultantly caused heavy damage to the said vehicle of the complainant. Thereafter the said car got removed from the spot and towed/ shifted to workshop at M/s Goyal Automotive (P) Ltd, Kapurthala Road, Jalandhar of the opposite party on 22/7/2020. The said vehicle of complainant was so badly damaged and hence it was decided by the insurance company as well as complainant that there is no use to get it repaired and hence the said vehicle was taken away from aforesaid workshop on 2/10/2020. That no service was provided or given by the opposite party as fully stated above, but the opposite party illegally demanded a sum of Rs. 65,000/- from complainant on the pretext of parking of the said vehicle in its workshop as well as for preparing the Repair estimate charges. Ultimately the opposite party allowed complainant to remove his vehicle only after paying a sum of Rs. 25,000/- on the pretext of above said charges vide receipt dated 2/10/2020. Thereafter the complainant got served a legal notice dated 6/10/2020 to the opposite party through his counsel but all in vain. Complainant further alleged that this amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Hence this complaint and has prayed that complaint of the complainant may kindly be accepted and OP be directed to refund the amount of Rs. 25,000/- alongwith interest @12% per annum from the date of payment i.e. 2/10/2020 till actual payment and further opposite party be also directed to pay Rs. 25,000/- as compensation/ damages on account of mental tension and harassment and Rs. 11,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite party and opposite party appeared through counsel and filed its written reply by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable in the present form, as the same is based upon wrong, false and frivolous facts. Opposite party submitted that the vehicle in question met with an accident and the complainant handed over the vehicle to answering opposite party on 22/7/2020 for repair and at that time, the complainant assured that the payment will be made by the insurance company or by the complainant himself, the opposite party allowed the complainant to park his damaged vehicle with opposite party and the complainant was provided with the estimated cost of repair after the accidental vehicle of the complainant was thoroughly checked by the engineers of the answering opposite party, but later on, the complainant did not give his consent for repairing his accidental vehicle. The opposite party, number of times requested the complainant to inform the answering opposite party whether he wants to get his accidental/ damaged vehicle repaired or not, but no satisfactory reply was accorded to the answering opposite party. The answering opposite party thereafter many times requested complainant to take away his accidental vehicle which was parked with the answering opposite party or to pay Rs. 250/- per day as parking charges but the complainant did not adhere to the request of the answering opposite party. Opposite party further alleged that complainant must pay requisite charges regarding cost of estimate provided by the engineers of the complainant and later on after great persuasion the complainant visited opposite party on 2/10/2020 and after paying Rs. 25,000/- in lieu of parking charges along with service charges took away his accidental vehicle from the premises of the answering opposite party. On merits, opposite party alleged that it is the complainant who did not get his vehicle repaired and parked his vehicle for about 72 days with the opposite party and after great persuasion the complainant agreed to take away his vehicle from the premises of opposite parry. It is incorrect that the opposite party illegally demanded a sum of Rs. 65,000/- from the complainant on the pretext of parking of said vehicle in its workshop as well as for preparing the repair estimate charges. As stated above, the opposite party charged Rs. 25,000/- in lieu of parking charges for about 72 days along with repair estimate charges as the engineers of the opposite party thoroughly checked the accidental vehicle of the complainant and prepared estimate of the same. The opposite party prayed that the complaint of the complainant is without merit and the same may be dismissed.
3. The complainant filed rejoinder to the written statement of OP reiterating the allegations made in the complaint and controverting those made in the written statement.
4. To prove his case, complainant submitted affidavit alongwith documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C5.
5. On the other hand, OP submitted affidavit without any document.
6. We have heard the argument of both the parties and after examining the case file, the commission is of the view that the complainant was the owner of car vehicle No. Pb09Y3029 and due to an accident on 22/7/2020, the car was damage and the complainant shifted his car to the workshop of opposite party and after elapse of about 72 days, the complainant took his car back from the opposite party. The opposite party admitted in his written statement that the car was parked in the premises of opposite party for 72 days and per day parking charges were Rs. 250/-. The complainant was charged with parking charges alongwith repair estimate charges which was prepared by the engineers of opposite party. But this Commission has observed that opposite party has not produced any document as proof in this regard, that what type of other services were provided by the opposite party to the complainant in addition the parking charges of vehicle. The opposite party has also admitted this fact in Para No.1 of preliminary objections and Para No. 4 of merits in written statement that per day parking charges for vehicle are Rs. 250/- per day and the car of complainant was parked in the premises of opposite party for 72 days. So as per this fact stated by the opposite party, the opposite party has right to charge only Rs. 18,000/- from complainant as calculated by this Commission i.e. Rs. 72 days x Rs. 250 per day is Rs. 18,000/- but the opposite party charges Rs. 25,000/- from complainant as per document Ex. C2 and on that document, no details have been provided that what kind of other services were provided by the opposite party to the complainant, which the opposite party has neither stated in their written statement nor any evidence in this regard has been produced by the opposite party. So the opposite party is entitled to charge Rs. 18,000/- as parking charges for 72 days @ 250 per day but opposite party charged Rs. 25,000/- from complainant Rs. 7,000/- has been charged by opposite party as extra amount from complainant.
7. Therefore the deficiency of opposite party towards complainant is proved and the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party is directed to refund Rs. 7,000/- which the opposite party has charged extra from the complainant alongwith interest @6% per annum on Rs. 7,000/- from date of filing of complaint till its realization. Further OP is also directed to pay Rs. 6,000/- as compensation due to harassment and litigation expenses.
8. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Dated
27/11/2024
S. Kanwar Jaswant Singh Rajesh Bhatia
Member President
