Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/382/2011

Dekka Ramalaxmi - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Siva Sankar Motors Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

K.S. Suresh Kumar

07 Mar 2015

ORDER

                                             Registration of the Complaint:27-09-2011                                                                            Date of Order :07-03-2015

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II:AT VISAKHAPATNAM

 

                             Present:

1.Sri H.ANANDHA RAO, M.A., L.L.B.,

       President

2.Sri C.V.N. RAO, M.A., B.L.,

                                             Male Member

3.Smt.K.SAROJA, M.A., B.L.,

       Lady Member

 

SATURDAY, 07^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2015

        CONSUMER CASE NO.382/2011

 

BETWEEN:

 

SMT.DEKKA RAMALAXMI W/O DEMUDU NAIDU,

HINDU, AGED 25 YEARS, R/O D.NO.15-285,

F-BLOCK, LAXMI NAGAR, BAJI JUNCTION,

GOPALAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM.

                                                                                      …COMPLAINANT

A N D:

 

1.M/S SIVA SANKAR MOTORS (P) LTD.,

PASSENGER CAR DEALER, TATA MOTORS,B-17,

NEAR 104 AREA  ROAD, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE ROAD,

INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, VISAKHAPATNAM-17.

2.M/S SIVA SANKAR MOTORS (P) LTD.,

TATA SHOW ROOM, REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER,

SRI KANYA THEATRE LANE, DONDAPARTHY,

VISAKHAPATNAM.

          …OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

This case coming on 24-02-2015 for final hearing before this Forum in the presence of SRI K.S.SURESH KUMAR, Advocate for the Complainant and of SRI D.V.V.R.PRATAP, Advocate for the Opposite Parties, and having stood over till this day for consideration, the Forum made the following:

 

O  R  D  E  R

(As per the Honourable President on behalf of the Bench)

1.       The Complainant filed the present complaint against the OPs, directing them to replace the Old 2009 Car with 2010 Model Car or else, pay Rs.1,00,000/- with interest from the date of purchase i.e., 8-2-2010 till the date of realization which is the difference cost in between 2009-2010 models, Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation with costs.

2.       The case of the complainant in brief is that she approached the 1^st OP in the month of February, 2010 who is the Authorized Dealer in Tata Motors and on enquiry about its performance, they promised that they will deliver 2010 model INDIGO MANZA AURAQUADRAZ to her and informed that the show room cost is Rs.5,90,326.33ps. and she has to pay Road Tax, Insurance etc., and believing the words, OP1, she purchased the said car for Rs.8,1370/- as initial amount and the remaining amount was financed by HDFC Bank, Visakhapatnam in total, she paid Rs.6,75,924/- for bringing the car on road.  While delivering the car, the 1^st OP issued all necessary papers including delivery acknowledgement note wherein they have intentionally failed to mention the month and year of manufacturing but the Insurance Policy details submitted through them, the year of manufacturing is mentioned as 2010. That she got surprised on receipt of the registration certificate from the registering authority month and year of manufacturing mentioned as December, 2009 and immediately she approached OP1 and when questioned about it, they stated by mistake car delivered to her is December 2009 Model. At the time of approach, she requested for 2010 model but she was provided 2009 Model and thereby the OPs committed mistake in causing loss to her nearly Rs.1,00,000/-. Even though, they have collected the amounts for 2010 model when he questioned the OPs they gave evasive replies and on that she got issued notice to the OPs, but, there was no response. Hence, this complaint.

3.       The case of Opposite Parties denying the material averments of the complaint is that the Complainant had purchased the Car on 03-02-2010 and the said vehicle got insured and delivered on the same day. Before purchasing the said car, they have categorically disclosed and stating that the said car was manufactured in the year 2009 and the same has been sent by manufacture  in the month of December, 2009 to the OP show room and after knowing the same, the complainant had accepted to purchase and before purchase, she verified the Engine and Chasis number and paid car price to the show room and further got registered the vehicle on 12-03-2010 as per RTA Act and obtained the Registration no.AP31 BF 1512 .

4.       That infact at the time of the registration of the car, the registering authority will register the chasis number and engine number by way of scanning the same in the presence of the vehicle owner. Accordingly, by the Registering Authorities in the presence of complainant as such, the complainant knew very well that the car was manufactured in the year 2009 as such the complainant did not raise the manufacturing aspect of the said vehicle even immediate to the registration of the said car. Subsequently, the complainant had attended 4  free services  of the said car and the OPs rendered proper services to the Complainant and during the said period also, she did not raise the manufacturing aspect.

5.       That after elapsing 15 months period, the complainant raised this issue for her unlawful gain by way of issuing legal notice with false contents. Since they are rendering proper service, the question of deficiency of service on their part, does not arise.  The demand of replacement of Car of the complainant is highly illegal. For these reasons, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

6.       To prove the case on behalf of the complainant, she filed her affidavit and  got marked Exhibits A1 to A8,  on other hand, on behalf of the OPs, the 1^st OP filed affidavit and got marked Exhibits B1 to B4.

7.       Exhibit A1 is the Delivery acknowledgement note dated 08-02-2011, Exhibit A2 is the Temporary Certificate of Registration issued by RTA Authority, dated 08-02-2010, Exhibit A3 is the Insurance Policy dated 03-02-2010, Exhibit A4 is the Regd., Lawyer’s Notice dated 14-06-2011, Exhibit A5 is the Acknowledgement of 1^st OP, dated 15-06-2011, Exhibit A6 is the Acknowledgement of 2^nd OP, dated 15-06-2011, Exhibit A7 is the Tax Invoice, dated 08-02-2010 and Exhibit A8 is the Certificate of Registration.

Exhibit B1 is the Reply Legal Notice got issued by both the OPs to the complainant’s counsel  dated 08-07-2011, Exhibit B2 is postal receipt dated 09-07-2011, Exhibit B3 is the returned Legal Notice cover dated 20-07-2011 and Exhibit B4 is the Certificate cum Policy schedule

8.       Both parties filed their written arguments.

9.       Heard oral arguments from both sides.

10.     Now the point for determination to be determined in this case is;

Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the OPs and the Complainant is entitled to any reliefs asked for?

11.     According to the complainant, they approached in the month of February, 2010 for purchase of Indigo Manza Aura-Quardraz  Car after receipt of the amount, the OP delivered the Car but when they approached for the registration certificate from the registering authority, they came to know the manufacturing date as December, 2009 but not December, 2010  but the OPs collected the amounts for 2010 Model and in spite of approach, the OP did not give proper reply and after issuance of the notice filed the present complaint.

12.     On the other hand, according to OPs, at the time of purchasing car from the complainant, they informed that the car was manufactured in the year 2009 December and knowing the same, the complainant had accepted to purchase the said vehicle after verifying the Engine and Chasis and thereafter only, they paid the car price and further got registered the vehicle on 12-03-2010.

13.     It is a fact that at the time of registration of a car, the registering authority will register the chasis and engine number by way of scanning the same in the presence of the owner. Therefore, it can be said that the complainant is well known that the car was manufactured in the year 2009 as such, he did not raise the manufacturing aspect even immediate to the Registration of the said Car. Further, the Complainant has attended all 4 free services of the said car and even at that time also, he did not raise the year of manufacturing of the said car whatsoever. Instead of raising objection not only at the time of registration of the car but also at the time of availing free services, the complainant got issued notice subsequently as an afterthought. Further, the reply notice was given by OP informing of the details of the Car. The documents relied upon by the OP clearly and categorically goes to show that the complainant is aware that the car purchased by her is 2009 model at the time of registration but she kept quiet and on the other hand availed 4 free services. For all these facts, it can be held that with an ulterior motto, the complainant came forward with such a plea as an afterthought. For all these reasons, the complaint filed by the complainant deserves to be dismissed.

14.     In the result, this complaint is dismissed. No costs.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, on this the 07^th day of March, 2015.

    Sd/-                                              Sd/-                                     Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                       MALE MEMBER                       PRESIDENT        

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

  For the Complainant:-

Exhibits	Date	Description
A-1	08-2-2011	Delivery Acknowledgement note	Photostat Copy
A-2	08-02-2010	Temporary Certificate of Registration issued by RTA Authority	Photostat copy
A-3	03-02-2010	Insurance Policy	Photostat Copy
A-4	14-06-2011	Regd. Lawyer’s Notice	Office copy
A-5	15-06-2011	Acknowledgement of 1st Opposite Party	Original
A-6	15-06-2011	Acknowledgement of 2nd Opposite Party	Original
A-7	08-02-2010	Tax Invoice	Original
A-8		Certificate of Registration	Photostat copy

 

For the Opposite Parties:-   

Exhibits	Date	Description
B-1	08-07-2011	Reply Legal Notice got issued by both the OPs to the Complainant’s counsel	Office copy
B-2	09-07-2011	Postal Receipt	Original
B-3	20-07-2011	Returned Legal Notice Cover	Original
B-4		Certificate cum police schedule	Photostat copy

 

     Sd/-                                              Sd/-                                          Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                            MALE MEMBER                        PRESIDENT