BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 07^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2024

ORDER

SMT.M.SHOBHA, PRESIDENT

1. The complaint has been filed under Section 35 of C.P.Act (hereinafter referred as an Act) against the OP for the following reliefs against the OP:-

1. Direct the OP to pay Rs.40,000/- towards loss of income.
2. Direct the OP to pay Rs.2,25,000/- towards amount owed to the complainant by the OPs.
3. Direct the OP to pay Rs.20,000/- towards mental trauma and agony.
4. Direct the OP to pay Rs.25,000/- towards the cost of litigation
5. Grant such other order or reliefs as this Hon’ble Commission deems fit.

2. The case set up by the complainant in brief is as under:-

The complainant is the owner of Hyundai i20 car bearing reg. No.KA 53 MH 2551, it met with an accident. The complainant has approached the OP to get the work done to his car. The OP has estimated the work charges amounting to Rs.2,25,000/- for restoring the car.  The complainant has paid an amount of Rs.2,25,000/- by way of cash and also online payment.

3. Even after making full payment by the complainant the OP has not done any work towards restoring the complainant’s car and kept on delaying the work on one or the other pretext.  Whenever the complainant contacted the OP he was not very responsive. In view of this the complainant has sustained loss of income as he has to run behind the OP company requesting the OP company to complete the car restoration project.  
4. After that the complainant has demanded the OP to repay the amount. Even though the OP has issued the cheque it was dishonored. Inspite of repeated demands and request the OP has failed to pay the amount of Rs.2,25,000/-.  Hence complainant got issued legal notice and inspite of service of the same, OP has neither replied nor complied with the demand. Hence the complainant has filed this complaint.
5. In response to the notice, OP has not appeared before this commission. Hence OP placed exparte.
6. The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence and relies on 07 documents. 
7. Heard the arguments of advocate for the complainant.    Perused the written arguments filed by the complainant.
8. The following points arise for our consideration as are:-

1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service on the part of OP?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to relief mentioned in the complaint?
3. What order?

9. Our answers to the above points are as under:

Point No.1:  Affirmative

Point No.2: Affirmative in part

Point No.3: As per final orders

REASONS

10. Point No.1 AND 2: These two points are inter related and hence they have taken for common discussion.  We have perused the allegations made in the complaint, affidavit evidence, written arguments and documents. Inspite of service of notice the OPs remained absent. Hence OPs neither challenged the allegations made in the complaint and also documents and they remained unchallenged. There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence and the documents placed by the complainant.

11. The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence reiterated all the allegations made in the complaint.  The complainant is the owner of the Hyundai i20 car bearing No.KA 53 MH 2551 and it was met with an accident.  After the accident the complainant has approached the OP car care centre.  The OP has estimated the charges for Rs.2,25,000/- and issued tax invoice as Ex.P1.  After that the complainant has paid Rs.2,25,000/- to the OP as Ex.P2 through online.  Inspite of taken sufficient time the OP has not completed the repair work and restored the car to its original position.  When the complainant has demanded the OP he has not given proper reply.  After that the complainant has also got issued legal notice demanding the OP to return the amount as Ex.P4.  Inspite of service of notice as per ex.P6 the OP neither issued any reply notice nor complied the request of the complainant.  

12. In view of the delay caused by the OP the complainant has sustained loss of income since he has to run behind the OP company requesting the OP to complete the car restoration project.  Even the OP has issued a cheque for refund of the amount and the same was dishonored.  After that the complainant has also requested the OP to pay the amount. Inspite of his request the OP has neither returned the car after attending the proper repairs nor refund the amount.

13. The conduct of the OP clearly discloses that he has committed deficiency of service and also unfair trade practice.  It is the duty of the OP to get the car repaired after received the entire estimated amount from the complainant.  The OP has neither refunded the amount nor got repaired the car. Under these circumstances, the complainant has sustained mental agony and also loss of income apart from the amount paid to the OP Rs.2,25,000/-.   When the OP has not done any work he has to return the entire amount.

14. Inspite of notice from this commission the OP remained absent.  If the OP has not committed any fault on his part he would have appeared before this commission and defend his case. Under these circumstances, the complainant has clearly established the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and mental agony sustained by him. Hence the complainant is entitled for the relief. Therefore, we answer point No.1 in affirmative and point No.2 partly in affirmative.

15. Point No.3:- In view the discussion referred above we proceed to pass the following;

O R D E R

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. The OP is directed to refund Rs.2,25,000/- to the complainant with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of payment till realization.
3. OP is further directed to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant.
4. The OP shall comply this order within 60 days from this date, failing which the OP shall pay interest at 12% p.a. after expiry of 60 days on Rs.2,25,000/- till final payment.
5. Furnish the copy of this order and return the extra pleadings and documents to the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 07^TH day of AUGUST 2024)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1;

NIL