West Bengal

Bankura

CC/42/2016

Josimuddin Gayen - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Suvadip Tractors - Opp.Party(s)

Durgaprasad Sarkar

13 Apr 2023

ORDER

    IN    THE   DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSION BANKURA

  Consumer Complaint No. 42/2016

Date of Filing: 04.07.2016

Before:                                       

1. Samiran Dutta                              Ld. President.      

2. Rina Mukherjee                          Ld. Member. 

3. Siddhartha Sankar Bhui            Ld. Member.

For the Complainant:  Ld Advocate Jayanta Kumar Mukhopadhyay

For the O.P. Ld. Advocate Kunal Kanti Ghosh

 

Complainant  

Josimuddin Gayen, S/o Aminur Gayen, at Vill- Angaria, Joypur, Bankura.

 

Opposite Party          

1.M/s Subhadip Tractors, Bishnupur

2.Cholamandalam Investment Finance Co. Ltd., Bankura Branch

 

FINAL ORDER / JUDGEMENT                

                                                                                                                                           

Order No.36

Dated:13-04-2023

Complainant files hazira through Advocate.

The case is fixed for argument.

No step is taken by the O.P.

After hearing argument from the complinant the Commission proceeds to dispose of the case as hereunder: -

The complainant’s case is that he purchased a new Sonalika tractor for Rs.7,24,999/- from O.P. No.1 with the financial assistance of Rs.4,00,000/- from O.P. No.2 in exchange of the old Tractor worth Rs.3,40,000/- on 09-11-2015. The loan has already been repaid to O.P. No.2 under one time settlement but the complainant found the price of the Tractor much higher than the prevailing market price of the same model at Rs.5,34,999/- as circulated in Daily Bengali newspaper Bartaman  dated: 19-11-2015. The complainant has therefore approached this Commission for refund of the difference amount with other reliefs.

                                                                                                                                                                                         Contd…….p/2

Page: 2

The O.P. No.1 contested the case by filing a written version contending inter alia that the Advertisement appearing in the Bartaman newspaper showing the Tractor price as Rs.5,34,999/- is misleading and it is variable from time to time and as such the complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case. 

-:Decision with Reasons:-

Having regard to the facts of the case, materials on record and the submission of the complainant the Commission finds that the new Tractor has been valued at Rs.7,24,999/- under the receipt dated: 09-11-2015 (vide Annexure-A) but the Advertisement appearing in the Bartaman newspaper dated: 19-11-2015 (vide Annexure-C) the price of the same model Tractor has been offered at Rs.5,34,999/-. Though the complainant could not produce the price chart from the authorized Dealer of Tractor but reliance can be placed upon the aforesaid Advertisement as it has not been denied by the O.P. in the written version taking only the plea that such price is always variable from time to time.

The Tractor in question was purchased on 09-11-2015 and the Advertisement in question is dated: 19-11-2015 and so the Advertisement as appearing in proof of the price of the Tractor in question no contrary price list is produced on behalf of the O.P. No.1 nor referred to in the written version.

In absence of any contrary proof as regards the price of the Tractor at the relevant time the Commission has to accept the public Advertisement appearing in a widely circulated Bengali newspaper. However considering exchange value of the old Tractor and other attending factors the Commission likes to assess the difference of price at Rs.1,00,000/- which the O.P. No.1 is bound to pay to the complainant within the stipulated period.

Hence  it is ordered……..

That the case be and the same is allowed in part on contest.

The O.P. No.1 is directed to pay to the complainant Rs.1,00,000/- within  one month from this date in default the order will be executed  in due process of law.

Both parties be supplied copy of this Order free of cost.  

 

 ____________________                   ________________                _________________

HON’BLE   PRESIDENT              HON’BLE MEMBER           HON’BLE MEMBER