BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL
Present: Sri.K.V.H.Prasad,B.A.,LL.B., President
And
Smt. C.Preethi, M.A.LL.B., Lady Member
Monday the 30th day of June, 2008
C.C.No. 109/07
Between:
M. Anwar Basha, S/o. M. Fakeer Saheb,
Flat No.104, Vishnu Apartment, Near Birla Gate, Kurnool.
… Complainant
Versus
M/s. M.S.A.Motors, Represented by its Authorised Dealer,
Abdullah Khan Estate, Kurnool.
… Opposite party
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri. M. Sivaji Rao, Advocate, for the complainant, and Sri. Md. Akram, Advocate, for the opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-
ORDER
(As per Smt. C.Preethi, Lady Member)
C.C.No.109/07
1. This consumer complaint of the complainant is filed U/s 12 of C.P.Act, 1986, seeking a direction on opposite party to return the cost of defective car body cover i.e., Rs.1,000/- with interest, Rs.15,000/- towards mental agony cost of the complaint and any other relief or reliefs which the complainant is entitled in the circumstances of the case.
2. The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that the complainant on 4-7-2007 enquired with opposite party for a good quality Maruthi Car cover and the opposite party showed a good quality cover and the same is purchased by him on 4-7-2007 for Rs.1,000/-. Thereafter, a week the complainant to clean the car body cover dipped the same in water and the entire outer layer of the cover came out and it is appearing awkwardly. On 16-7-2007 the opposite party asked the complainant to come on 17-7-2007 for getting it replaced with new cover. Accordingly the complaint approached the opposite party, but the opposite party refused to replaced the cover. Hence, the complainant resorted to the forum for reliefs.
3. In support of his case the complainant relied on the following documents viz., M.O.I defective Car cover, (1) Bill dated 4-7-2007 for Rs.1,000/- issued by opposite party, (2) office copy of legal notice, dated 19-7-2007 along with acknowledgement and receipts and (3) reply of opposite party dated 25-7-2007, besides to the sworn affidavit of complaint and 3rd pay and replies to the interrogatories exchanged and the above documents are marked as Ex.A1 to A3 for its appreciation in this case.
4. In pursuance to the notice of this forum the opposite party appeared through their standing counsel and contested the case by filling written version.
5. The written version of opposite parties admits the purchase of car cover by the complainant for Rs.1,000/- on 4-7-2007. The opposite parties before to purchase the said cover informed about the cover in detail to the complainant and there is no special contract in between the parties regarding the guarantee and warranty. Before tendering the cost of the product it is for the complainant to inspect the product and if he satisfied then only he will tender the sale price of the product, it was informed to the complainant that the cover is local made and it is not branded one, after fully inspecting the said cover the complainant purchased it. The complainant alleges that the said cover was washed in water and it is silent as to the use of hot water or cool water whether any chemicals are used. The cover is made of rexene and it should not be dipped in hot water and it should not add any chemicals to the water. More over after using the product it is not possible for any trader for exchange, if the cover is intact there is every possibility to said the request of the complainant. Hence, there is no deficiency of service and the seller has not promised about the quality of the product and the sale transaction does not contained any clause regarding the quality and seeks for the dismissal of complaint with costs.
6. In substantiation of their case the opposite party filed an alleged similar cover as that of MOI and the said cover is marked as Ex.B1, besides to the sworn affidavit of the opposite party in reiteration of their written version averments.
7. Hence, the point for consideration is to what relief the complainant is entitled to ?.
8. It is a simple case of the complainant that he purchased a car cover from opposite party vide Ex.A1 bill dated 4-7-2007 for Rs. 1,000/-. After one week the complainant to clean the cover dipped in water and the outer layer of the cover came out and it is looking awkwardly, hence approached opposite party to replace it with new one, but the opposite party refused. Hence, got issued legal notice dated 19-7-2007 vide Ex.A2 stating the same given that outer layer of the cover came out after dipping in water. The opposite party replied vide Ex.A3 dated 25-7-2007 stating the cover purchased by the complainant is not a branded one and no warranty is given on the said cover.
9. On the other hand the opposite party is not denying the sale of said cover MOI to the complainant vide Ex.A1. During the course of enquiry the opposite party submitted that the Ex.B1 is same quality and which was demonstrated in drenching the Ex.B1 in a bucket of water before the parties during enquiry on 29-5-2008, and it did not get any adverse effect, but however there appears slight difference in the quality in between MOI and B1 apparent to the naked eye. In the light of the submission of opposite party as to the same quality of MOI and B1 and the MOI was said to have been effected on drenching in water. There appears any material prejudice to the opposite party if the MOI is substituted to the complainant with Ex.B1, especially when any instructions as to dos and dont’s were left provided to the purchaser by the seller of the goods sold.
10. Hence, the complaint is allowed to return the MOI to opposite party and the Ex.B1 to the complainant on expiry of appeal period. In the circumstances of the case as there appears any considerable mental agony and inccurment of cost. No compensation and no costs are ordered.
Dictated the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 30th day of June, 2008.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant :Nil For the opposite parties :Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
MOI - Car Cover
Ex.A1. Bill dated 4-7-2007 of Rs.1,000/- issued by opposite
Party.
Ex.A2. Office copy of legal notice, dated 19-7-2007 along with acknowledgement and receipts.
Ex.A3. Reply of opposite party dated 25-7-2007.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:
Ex.B1. An alleged similar cover as that of MOI.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite part
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
Copy was delivered to parties :
