Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/447/2023

ABHISHEK MISHRA - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S REAL VALUE MOTOR - Opp.Party(s)

RAKESH GUPTA

04 Jul 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/447/2023
Date of Institution	:	14/09/2023
Date of Decision	:	04/07/2024

 

 

Sh.Abhishek Mishra, S/o Sh.Rakesh Sharma C/o Media Cookies Network Pvt. Ltd., SCO 1020-21, Second Floor, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh

 

Complainant

Vs

 

1. Real Value Motor through its Prop. Sh.Manish Kumar Bansal, Address: 14/56, Opposite of Chawala Nursing Home, Mandi Sayid Khan, Hariparvat Road, Agra PIN-282002.

 

2. Sh.Manish Kumar Bansal, Address: 14/56, Opposite of Chawala Nursing Home, Mandi Sayid Khan, Hariparvat Road, Agra PIN-282002

 

3. Sh.Apoorv Bansal Manager & Authorized Person of M/s Real Value Motor Address: 14/56, Opposite of Chawala Nursing Home, Mandi Sayid Khan, Hariparvat Road, Agra PIN-282002.

Opposite Parties

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                

ARGUED BY	:	Sh.Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for Complainant.
	:	Sh.Ravi Inder Singh, Advocate for OP(s).

Per Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member

1.      Averments are that the complainant was looking for a used car and visited popular e-marketplace's website, OLX where the respondent's advertisement was posted, dated 17/04/22 about selling a used car, the make and model of which was TATA TIAGO, MODEL 2017, 1.05 REVOTORQ XT, DIESEL, fully inspected, non-accidental, certified used cars with up to 1 year Warranty with 48000 kms running in excellent condition Annexure C-1 (colly). After gaining assurance from the OPs, the complainant decided to purchase said car for a sum of Rs.3,47,822/- and deposited a sum of Rs.10,000/- as an advance to the entire payment on 27/08/22 and a further sum of Rs.25,000-/- on 9/9/2022 and the balance amount through a car loan from Yes Bank dated 2/12/22 of Rs.3,12,822-/- (Annexure C-2). The car in question was purchased by the complainant and he received the car on 9/9/22 after getting sanction of loan from Yes Bank. Despite the car being certified as "excellent" & non-accidental as written in the advertisement, the car started giving several issues on the way back and broke down on the way to Zirakpur from Agra on dated 13.09.22 due to the engine overheating. After the car broke down, it was taken to repair shop in Zirakpur where, upon close inspection, several underlying issues surfaced, such as chassis rusting, door latch problems, shocker breakage, radiator problems, ineffective AC Cooling, Main Glass breakage and others. The complainant took the vehicle to Berkeley Tata Motors service center in Zirakpur on dated 25.05.2023 for repair, who provided him the service history of vehicle, which clearly shows that vehicle was accidental and driven around 91204 kms on dated 23.06.2020 (Annexure C-3). The service center also disclosed that the car was not given for service since the year 2020 and was handled by unauthorized garages which have caused damage to the engine and other parts. The service center further informed that the odometer has been tempered and altered to show that the car has run lesser kilometer which the said car has actually run more than a mileage of 108000 kms. The complainant approached the OPs, but they refused to accept the figures of kilometers having been travelled, as said by the service center executives. The complainant sent a legal notice to the OPs on 26.06.2023 (Annexure C-4). Hence, is the present consumer complaint.
2.     OPs contested the consumer complaint, filed their written reply and stated that as per the prayer of the complainant pertaining to tampering the odometer it is submitted that firstly the same was never tampered by the OP's. Secondly the car was sold to the complainant "as it is" without any tampering of the odometer rather the OP's got the vehicle repaired/rectified as per the demands of the complainant. Even if we go through the alleged advertisement are attached by the complainant as Annexure C-1, the same does not talk of odometer history in it at all nor does the OP's take responsibility for the same. It is pertinent to mention here that at no point did the OP's ever claim that the car had run 48,000 kms as mentioned by the complainant in his complaint. He be put to strict proof of the averments in this regard. Further as per the alleged annexure C1, at page number 21 the kilometres mentioned is 42,000, this clearly shows that the complainant is trying to hoodwink this Commission by producing false documents and is trying to harass the OP's. Further, the alleged issue of the odometer tempering has been raised by the complainant after about more than 8 months from the date of receiving of the vehicle. Rather the odometer tampering has been done by the complainant himself in order to harass the OP's and to take a false claim from this Commission. On these lines, the case is sought to be defended by the OPs.
3.     Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated.
4.     Parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
5.     We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and gone through the record of the case.
6.     The main grievance of the complainant is that the OPs have provided him a vehicle of which the odometer was tempered and the vehicle was certified as non-accidental & having run 48000 kms, which was wrongly stated by the OPs in their advertisement.
7.     We have perused the report of authorized service centre (Annexure C-3) which clearly shows that the vehicle had run 91204 kms on 23.06.2020 and the vehicle was accidental vehicle wherein the complainant has received the said vehicle on 09.09.2022, on the basis of advertisement which showed that vehicle had run 48000 kms only.
8.     We are of the considered view that by showing the vehicle having run 48000 kms instead of giving the true running of vehicle as 91204 kms before the sale of vehicle, the OPs are deficient in providing service and have indulged in unfair trade practice.  
9.     In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly partly allowed. The OPs are, jointly & severally, directed as under:-

1. to pay a lumpsum compensation amount of ₹25,000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him.

10.     This order be complied with by the OPs within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy thereof, failing which the amount(s) mentioned at Sr.No.(i) above shall carry penal interest @ 12% per annum (simple) from the date of expiry of said period of 45 days, till realization.
11.      Pending miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed of.
12.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

			Sd/-
04/07/2024			[Pawanjit Singh]
Ls			President
			Sd/-
			[Surjeet Kaur]
			Member
			Sd/-
			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
			Member