Nutan Kapoor filed a consumer case on 10 Sep 2018 against M/s VST Granduer & 2 others in the South Chennai Consumer Court. The case no is CC/134/2018 and the judgment uploaded on 23 Feb 2019.
Date of Filing : 26.12.2017 Date of Order : 10.09.2018
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)
@ 2ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3.
PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L. : PRESIDENT
TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B. : MEMBER-I
C.C. No.134/2018
DATED THIS MONDAY THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018
Nutan Kapoor,
W/o. Ravi Kapoor,
New No.5, Old No.3,
Chandra Bagh Avenue,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004. .. Complainant.
..Versus..
1. M/s. VST Grandeur,
Rep. by its Deputy General Manager – Sales,
“A” Wing, KGN Towers,
Ground Floor,
New No.62, Old Nos.31 & 32,
Ethiraj Salai,
Egmore,
Chennai – 600 008.
2. Tata Motors Ltd.,
Rep. by its Managing Director,
CeeJay House,
Second Floor, Shivsagar Estate,
Worli,
Mumbai – 400 018.
3. Jaguar Land Rover India Limited,
Rep. by its Managing Director,
No.202/203, Ceejay House,
Shivsagar Estate,
Dr. Annie Besant Road,
Worli,
Mumbai – 400 018. .. Opposite parties.
Counsel for the complainant : M/s. Nirmal Kumar & another
Counsel for the 1st opposite party : M/s. S. Raghunathan & others
Opposite parties 2 & 3 : Exparte
ORDER
THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT
This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to pay a sum of Rs.1,90,029/- collected from the complainant towards the purchase of the vehicle along with interest at 24% p.a. from the date of payment till 31.10.2017 totaling to a sum of Rs.2,77,442/- along with future interest, to pay a sum of Rs.10,518/- towards balance amount due under the aforesaid scheme with interest at 24% p.a. from 11.03.2016 till 31.10.2017 totaling to a sum of Rs.14,515/- along with future interest and to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for misrepresentations, making false promises of factory fitting of reverse camera and mental agony with cost to the complainant.
Both the complainant and 1st opposite party filed Joint Compromise Memo which is recorded. In view of the Joint Compromise Memo, this case is dismissed as withdrawn subject to the realization of cheque. The Joint Compromise Memo form part of the order.
MEMBER –I PRESIDENT
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.