ORDER
By Jayasree Kallat, Member
The petition was filed on 26.06.09. Petition is filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant had purchased a Santro Zing GLS(M) on an exchange offer Scheme from the opposite parties on 18.01.2008. As per the exchange offer scheme opposite parties have offered Rs.15,000/- as exchange bonus. Apart from the exchange bonus offer there were certain other offers also which the opposite parties have complied at the time of delivery of the new vehicle. The exchange bonus offer was not given to the complainant even after the promised six months. The complainant had contacted Ist opposite party several times but there was no response. The complainant has filed this petition alleging negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties for not giving the exchange offer money which they have promised to give within six months of delivery of the vehicle.
Opposite party No.1 has filed a version denying the averments in the complaint, except those that are expressly admitted. The complaint is not maintainable, complainant is not entitled to any relief and opposite party No.1 is not liable to pay any amount to the complainant. The opposite party No.1 submits that they are only the dealer and service center of opposite No.2. The manufacturer opposite party No.2 from time to time makes offer and floats different schemes regarding the sale of vehicles manufactured by them. Opposite party No.1 being an authorized dealer acts as per the instructions and the terms and conditions stipulated by opposite party No.2. The exchange bonus offer is one such scheme implemented by second opposite party. The second opposite party decides the eligibility regarding the entitlement to the exchange bonus. Opposite party No.1 admits that complainant had purchased a Santro Xing GLS(M) Car from them. The exchange bonus claim submitted by the complainant was forwarded to opposite party No.2. Opposite party No.2 had intimated that the complainant is not eligible for the exchange bonus, as he had not complied with the terms and conditions. Hence the request was rejected. There is no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.1. Hence opposite party No.1- prays to dismiss the petition with compensatory cost.
Opposite party No.2 had represented before the forum but has not filed any version. It was represented by the opposite parties that they are ready to settle the matter by paying Rs.15,000/- the exchange bonus money. Opposite party had paid Rs.15,000/- on 12.05.2010 and deposited the amount in the forum. The complainant did not accept the money.
The only point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled for any relief.
Complainant was examined as PW1.Exhibits A1 to A7 were marked on complainants side .No oral evidence adduced by opposite parties. Exhibits B1 and B2 marked on opposite party’s side.
The case of the complainant is that he had purchased a santro zing GLS(M) car by exchanging his old santro car on an exchange offer benefit scheme. According to the complainant the opposite parties had several offers including exchange bonus of Rs.15000/-. While taking delivery of the new vehicle the opposite parties had provided all the offers except exchange bonus offer. The opposite party No.1 promised to provide the bonus money within six months from the delivery of the vehicle. The complainant’s case is that even after a lapse of one and a half year the opposite parties did not keep up their promise. They have not provided the exchange bonus offer money. Complainant alleges that he had repeatedly requested the opposite parties but they have not complied. The opposite party No.1 has taken a contention that they are not a necessary party in this case as they are only the authorized service center and dealer of opposite party No.2. According to opposite party No.1 it is for opposite party No.2 to provide the offer as all the schemes are implemented by opposite party No.2.
The complainant‘s case is that he has submitted all the documents before opposite party No.1. It is for opposite party No.1 to forward the documents to opposite party No.2. Moreover complainant points out that if his claims for exchange bonus are rejected opposite parties have not given any reason for rejecting. In any case the opposite parties No.1 & 2 had represented before the forum that they are ready to settle the claim by paying Rs.15,000/- the exchange bonus money to the complainant. On 12.05.2010 opposite party No.1 had deposited Rs.15000/- before the forum. The matter was not settled as the complainant was not ready to accept the amount. After going through the document Ext.A1 to A7 produced by the complainant it is evident that complainant had repeatedly requested the opposite parties for the exchange offer money. No document is produced by the opposite parties to show that the complainant is not entitled for the said amount. It has been clear that the complainant is entitled for Rs.15000/- the exchange bonus offer money. If so it is also clear that the complainant has not received the entitled amount from the opposite parties even after two years. Hence we are of the opinion that he is entitled for the amount. As the opposite parties have already deposited the amount before the forum, the complainant can withdraw the amount from the forum. As there was delay in payment complainant is also entitled for a compensation.
In the result the petition is allowed and complainant is permitted to withdraw the amount of Rs.15000/- which is deposited before the forum by the opposite parties. Apart from this amount of Rs.15000/- the opposite parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.5000/-as compensation to the complainant within one month of receiving the copy of the order.
Pronounced in the open court this the 30th day of April 2011.
Date of filing :26.06.2009.
SD/-PRESIDENT SD/- MEMBER SD/-MEMBER.
APPENDIX
Documents exhibited for the complainant:
A1. Order Booking form of KTC Hyundai dtd. 18.01.2007.
A2. Letter to the complainant by opposite party dtd Nil
A3.Letter from the complainant to the opposite party with postal
Acknowledgement
A4. E.mail letter from the complainant to the opposite party .
A5. Reply E.mail letter from the opposite party to the complainant.
A6. Reply E.mail letter from the opposite party regarding the mail reference.
A7. Lawyer notice to the opposite party dtd. 17.04.2009 with postal
acknowledgement.
Documents exhibited for the opposite party:
B1.Exchange Bonus terms and conditions
B2.Status of exchange claim E.Mail letter by opposite party.
Witness examined for the complainant:
PW1.Dr.Radhakrishnan.T.S.(Complainant)
Witness examined for the opposite party:
None.
Sd/-Presidnent
//True copy//
(Forwarded/By Order)
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
