PER MR.JUSTICE A.P.BHANGALE, HON’BLE PRESIDENT.

1)      The appellant who is original complainant (Senior Citizen) is aggrieved by judgment and order dated 05/07/2008, in consumer complaint case No.28/2008 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Nagpur, whereby the complaint came to be dismissed.

2)      Briefly stated it was case of the complainant that he had bought Maruti Esteem Car bearing registration No.MH-31/CP-3283. On the basis that there was offer to repurchase the old 800 Maruti Car by the respondent/opposite party No.2 for Rs.55,000/-.

3)     Sum of Rs.40,000/- was thus payable as value of old car and Rs.15,000/- towards loyalty discount. The complainant had in view of the offer made by opposite party No.2 sold his car to opposite party No.2 for Rs.55,000/- out of which sum of Rs.40,000/- was to be adjusted from the value of new Esteem car and Rs.15,000/- was to be paid separately by cheque to the complainant. The new car was purchased under invoice No.54104 dated 27/04/2007 for sum of Rs.4,32,000/- less Rs.15,000/- towards loyalty discount payable to  the complainant before the vehicle was registered in his name. The opposite party No.2 refused to pay sum of Rs.15,000/- towards loyalty discount on the ground that 800 Car (old car) was  in the name of brother in law of the complainant and not in his name. According to complainant it was a lame excuse as the old car was inspected and value of the same was assessed before it was accepted by opposite partyNo.2.

4)      Our attention is invited to communication dated 15/06/2007, wherein after perusing the letter dated 14/06/2007 regarding the purchase scheme, the complainant was informed that the vehicle must be  in his name or his close blood relations in order to avail of the offer of benefit of loyalty bonus. When earlier by communication dated 07/05/2007 complainant was informed by opposite party No.2 that loyalty discount of Rs.15,00/- will be sent to the complainant. Thus the opposite party No.2 had back tracked from the offer made to complainant.

5)      It is thus submitted on behalf of appellant that there was non application of mind to these facts by learned Forum below, in dismissing the complaint ignoring that there was deficiency in service as also unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party No.2 in particular. According to appellant both the opposite party Nos.1 and 2 are responsible to pay this loyalty bonus to the complainant in the sum of Rs.15,000/- as promised by opposite party.

6)      On behalf of opposite party No.1/manufacturer of the car it is submitted that complainant was also aware of the offer made from opponent No.2 as awarded in the complaint itself and it was not a manufacturer’s offer, but dealer’s offer. Therefore opposite party No.2 at the most was responsible to pay the amount which was paid for by the complainant and not opposite party No.1. The opposite party No.2 remained absent. No one appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2 at the final hearing. Opposite party No.3 is a financer which is  formal party to the appeal.

7)      Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in our view the complainant ought to have been allowed against opposite party No.2 who had made offer to pay loyalty bonus in the sum of Rs.15,000/- but then back tracked from the same. Hence we set aside the impugned judgment and order and hold that there was deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party No.2. We therefore partly allowed the complaint with order that the opposite party No.2 M/s.Automative Manufacturers Pvt.Ltd, 575, Kampee Road, Nagpur, as dealer on behalf of M/s.Maruti Udyog Ltd. shall pay the amount of Rs.15,000/- to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order together with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of the purchase of the vehicle i.e. 27/04/2007 until realisation of the amount. The opposite party No.2 shall also pay sum of Rs.5,000/- towards mental and physical harassment of the complainant and sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost, as also sum of Rs.5,000/- towards cost of this appeal which opposite party No.2 shall pay to the complainant. Opposite party Nos.1 and 3 in our view are not liable to honour the award as they are formal party..