DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
PATIALA.
Consumer Complaint No. 332 of 24.8.2016
Decided on: 8.6.2017
Amarjit Singh Monga, 15, Brar Street, Near 22 No.Phatak, Patiala.
…………...Complainant
Versus
1. M/s Hyundai Motor India Ltd., Irrungattukotai, NH No.4, Sriperumbudur Taluk, District Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu-602117 through its Managing Director/Directors.
2. M/s Hyundai Motor India Ltd.,Northern Regional Office, Unit No.C-113-114, 1st Floor, Office Suites Elante, Plot No.178-178A, Industrial Business Park, PH-1, Chandigarh-160002 through its Regional Manager.
3. M/s Saturn Vehicles Pvt. Ltd. GKP Hyundai c/o Sandeep Motors, Gobind Bagh, Rajpura Road, Patiala-147001 through its Partners.
4. M/s Team Promotions Private Ltd., C-30, 2nd Floor, Patparganj Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 through its Partners/Authorized person.
…………Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Smt. Neena Sandhu, President
Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member
ARGUED BY:
Sh.Amarjit Singh Monga,complainant in person.
Sh.S.P.Singh Sighu, Advocate,
counsel for Opposite Parties No.1&2.
Opposite party No.3 ex-parte.
Sh.Sudhir Kumar,Advocate,
counsel for opposite party No.4.
ORDER
SMT.NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT
Sh.Amarjit Singh Monga, complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as the O.Ps.) .The brief facts of the complaint are as under:
2. That the complainant purchased one Hyundai Verna car, model CRDI SX 1.6 white diesel, from OP no.3, manufactured by OP no.1, vide retail invoice No.0014 dated 27.8.2014, after making the payment of full consideration amount of Rs.10,28,217/-.At the time of purchase, it was told by OP no.3 that there was an offer of free holiday package of Dubai for a couple( which includes air tickets, lodging and boarding, sight seeing and dhow cruise) from OP no.1 on the purchase of Verna Car, and provided a brochure in that regard, in which total benefits of Rs.1,00,000/-were mentioned. It was assured by OP no.3 that no other charges would be paid by the purchaser of Verna Car .It was also told by Op no.3 that free Dubai holiday voucher would be delivered after the closure of the scheme on 31.8.2014 alongwith Dubai Visa, valid till six months from the date of journey. In the month of October,2014, OP no.3 delivered voucher No.363446, mentioning certain conditions on it and instructed the complainant to contact OP no.4 in this regard. As per condition No.3 , the complainant had to sent the duly filled voucher alongwith demand draft of Rs.19,998/-as fee for couple to OP no.4.It is averred that the complainant has no choice rather to fulfill the demand of OP no.4 and accordingly he made the payment of Rs.19,998/- vide demand draft No.642223 dated 28.10.2014 also also sent the duly filled voucher & other necessary documents through courier.Thereafter vide e-mail dated 28.11.2014, OP no.4 asked the complainant, for the deposit of visa fee of Rs.12400/-whereas the same has been mentioned as Rs.4800/- for each passenger in condition No.5 of the voucher. The complainant made the payment of Rs.12400/- to Op no.4 vide demand draft No.642330 dated 1.12.20214.The departure date was fixed as 21.2.2015.Vide e-mails dated 24.1.2015, 6.2.2015 and 7.2.2015, the complainant asked OP no.4 for the details of the flight so as to enable him to book entry tickets to Burj Khalifa, Dubai but of no use. As per conditions no.10 of the voucher, OP no.4 was bound to notify the air ticket and tour details 15 days prior to departure . Vide e-mail dated 7.2.2015, he made complaints to OPs no.1&2 with CC to OPs no.3&4. He also protested against OPs no.1to3 having sent e-mail dated 10.2.2015, 11.2.2015,13.2.2015 and 14.2.2015 and requested them to refund the amount deposited by him. It is averred that Op no.4 provided the Hotel vouchers, E-visa and flight tickets to him on 19.2.2015. It is averred that as per brochure of OP no.1 holiday package was included boarding and lodging but only breakfast and 2 dinners were provided at hotel.No lunch was provided during the tour. It is averred that charging of Rs.32,398/- against the offer of Free Dubai Holiday Package on purchase of Verna Car, amounts to unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs, for which he is suffering from mental agony and physical harassment.The OPs are also deficient in rendering the service.Hence this complaint with a prayer for a direct ion to the OPs to refund the amount of Rs.32,398/- alongwith interest from the date of deposit till realization, Rs.1,00,000/-as compensation on account of mental agony and physical harassment and Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses. Any other relief, which this Forum may deem fit may also be granted.
3. On being put to notice, OPs No.1,2 &4 appeared and filed their written version, while OP no.3 failed to come present despite service and was accordingly proceeded against exparte.
4. In the written version, filed by OPs No.1&2 , preliminary objection have been taken to the effect that the complaint is liable to be dismissed on the sole ground that no cause of action has arisen against Hyundai Motor India Limited and all the allegations are leveled against OPs no.3&4.On merits it is submitted that it being a manufacturer of Hyundai cars, OP no.3 is carrying out retail sale and after sale service of the vehicles manufactured by HMIL. It deals with all its dealers on a principal-to-principal basis and errors/omission/representations, if any, at the time of retailing or servicing of the car is the sole responsibility of the concerned dealer/workshop.It is further averred that being the manufacturer of the Hyundai car, its liability is limited and extends to its warranty obligations alone.It has not received any consideration from complainant and all monies were paid to the dealer and OP no.3 directly. There is no privity qua HMIL and complainant.There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of OPs no.1&2. After denying all other averments, made in the complaint , it is prayed to dismiss the complaint.
5. In the written version, filed by Op no.4, it is admitted that in the month of October,2014, OP no.3 had delivered one voucher No.363446, with certain printed conditions on the same, and instructed the complainant to contact OP no.4 in this regard. It is averred that the complainant with his own will sent the demand draft of Rs.19,998/- dated 28.10.2014 of State Bank of Patiala payable at Delhi. It is admitted that as per terms and conditions it informed the complainant through e-mail dated 28.11.2014 to send visa fee of Rs.12400/- for a couple. The complainant sent the said amount through Bank draft No.642330 dated 1.12.2014 alongwith letter under his signature. It is averred that the letter written by the complainant speaks the entire truth. It is stated that the complainant purchased the car in the month of August,2014 and the passport of his wife was to expire in the month of May,2015i.e. on 15.5.2015. It is stated that it has no direct contact or link with the complainant. It has having link with OPs no.1&2 only.It is further stated that it has charged the amount prevalent at that time. It is stated that in terms and conditions, it was specifically mentioned that the tickets and other things would be provided within 48 hours , prior to the flight. There is no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on its part. After denying all other averments made in the complaint, it is prayed to dismiss the complaint.
6. On being called to do so, the complainant tendered in evidence his own affidavit,Ex.CA alongwith the documents Exs.C1 to C17 and closed the evidence.
The ld .counsel for OPs no.1&2 tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh.Sukomal Satyen, Asstt. Manager Legal & Sect. of Hyundai Motors India Ltd. Ex.OPA alongwith document Ex.OP1 and closed the evidence
The Ld. counsel for OP no.4 tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh.Gaurav Dhawan, Director of OP no.4 alongwith documents Exs.OP2 to OP 47 and closed the evidence.
7. We have heard the complainant, ld. counsel for OPs No.1,2&4, gone through the written arguments filed by the complainant and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
8. Admittedly complainant purchased the Verna car manufactured by Ops no.1&2 from Op no.3 vide retail invoice dated 27.8.2014, Ex.C1, for an amount of Rs.10,28,217/- and availed the Buy and Fly to Dubai offer, as is evident from booking request form, Ex.C3.The complainant has pleaded that although it was a free tour but the OP no.4 has charged a sum of Rs.32,398/- for the same. The Op no.4 has booked their flight in a manner that their whole day was spoiled and they could only spent two and a half days in Dubai instead of four days.Even, the proper facilities and food during the stay at Dubai were not provided to them.
9. The stand of Ops no.1&2 is that Free Holiday offer was not given by them but by its dealer i.e. Op no.3. They have their relations with their dealer on principle to principle basis. Therefore, they are not responsible for any omission or commission or their dealer. Even no specific allegation has been leveled by the complainant again them.
10. The stand of OP no.4 is that on purchase of Verna car by the complainant, the OP no.3 had given him a free Dubai Holiday voucher containing certain conditions on the same. As per term no.12 of terms and conditions of Dubai holiday voucher, a sum of Rs.19998/- would be payable by the complainant towards airport tax, fuel surcharge and other tax. Visa fee for a couple were also stated to be payable as per term no.5 of the terms and conditions. Accordingly it had rightly got deposited Rs.19,998/- + Rs.12,400 totaling Rs.32398/- from the complainant,as per the terms and conditions of the said voucher. Nothing excess has been charged from the complainant. The booking for the tour, for stay at Dubai for four nights and five days was done after consulting the complainant. The information regarding booking of the air tickets from Delhi to Dubai and other tour details were provided to him in time. All the facilities during the stay of the complainant and his wife at Dubai were provided as per the terms and conditions of the brochure and the voucher. Thus, no deficiency can be attributed on its part.
11. It may be stated that in condition No.13 of the terms and conditions for Dubai Holiday voucher annexed alongwith the form,Ex.C3, it is mentioned that “pl send the booking request form with a very clear photocopy of the valid passport and pan cards of the recipients and the co passenger alongwith a demand draft of Rs.19,998/- only towards the air port tax, fuel charge and other taxes” In condition of 5. it is mentioned that “Visa charges, will be as per actuals, currently the visa charges are Rs.4800/-, per person for Duabi but they can vary on time to time basis”. As such, as per conditions No.5 and 13 of the terms and conditions of voucher Ex.C-3, OP no.4 was justified in charging the amount of Rs.32,398/-( Rs.19998/-+ Rs.12400/-) on account of visa fee and airport tax etc . Since the services were provided as per the terms and conditions of the voucher, therefore, the Ops. cannot be held to be deficient in providing the services.
12. In view of the above referred facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the complaint is devoid of merit and the same is hereby dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of cost under the rules.Thereafter file be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.
ANNOUNCED
DATED:8. 6. 2017
NEENA SANDHU
PRESIDENT
NEELAM GUPTA
MEMBER
