Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/131/2015

M/s.A.Vijayalakshmi - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.KLN Motor Agencies P Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.C.E.Pratap

28 Nov 2017

ORDER

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  16.07.2015

                                                                Order pronounced on:  28.11.2017

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

        PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

              THIRU. M.UYIRROLI KANNAN B.B.A., B.L.,      MEMBER - I

 

TUESDAY THE 28^th   DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017

 

C.C.NO.131/2015

 

 

Mrs.A.Vijayalakshmi,

Wife of Mr.T.Anandan,

No.7, 4^th Street,

Bank Colony (MMC),

Chennai – 600 051.

                                                                                    ….. Complainant

 

..Vs..

1.The Manager,

M/s. General Motors India Limited,

Having its Registered Office at Block-B,

Chandrapura Industrial Estate,

Halol – 389 351, District Panchrnahals,

Gujarat.

 

2.The Manager,

M/s. KLN Motor Agencies (P) Ltd.,

Plot No.861, New No.232,

Poonamalleee High Road,

Kilpauk,

Chennai – 600 010.

.....Opposite Parties

 

Date of complaint                                 : 26.08.2015

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.C.E.Pratap, T.Saranya,

                                                                    V.Dhamodharan

 

Counsel for 1^st Opposite Party                 : M/s. V.Shankar & Lavanya Shankar

 

Counsel for 2^nd opposite party                       : M/s Jayanthi K Shah        

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant to direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.15000/- towards exchange bonus and also to pay compensation for mental agony with cost of the complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The 1^st opposite party is the manufacturer of “Chevrolet” cars and the 2^nd opposite party is the dealer engaged in selling his cars. The complainant purchased a Chevrolet Spark LT Car from the 2^nd opposite party during October 2012 by exchanging his Santro Car. The price of the car fixed at Rs.4,05,000/-  after deducting the Exchange Bonus of Rs.15,000/-. The complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,05,000/- on 10.10.2012 and Rs.3,00,000/- on 11.10.2012 and she took delivery of the car on 12.10.2012.

          2. Regarding exchange bonus of Rs.15,000/- the 2^nd opposite party will refund at the earliest. However, on 14.10.2012 the complainant received a phone call from Mrs. Lakshmi priya from the 2^nd opposite party to pay Rs.15,000/- assuring that the amount will be refunded to the complainant earliest. Believing the same, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.15,000/- on 15.10.2012 and the same was endorsed by the 2^nd opposite party in his letter dated 12.10.2012 that the said amount will be refunded. Again on 14.10.2012, the said Mrs. Lakshmi Priya from the 2^nd opposite party called the complainant to pay Rs.15,000/- towards Exchange Bonus. The fact of payment of Rs.15,000/- on 15.10.2012 to the 2^nd opposite party has not been informed to Mrs.Lakshmi Priya and thereby resorting to unfair trade practice.

          3. The complainant sent a letter dated 25.06.2013 to the customer Assistance Centre, another letter dated 02.12.2014 to the 2^nd opposite party and also sent legal notice dated 24.03.2015 to the opposite parties demanding to refund the amount of Rs.15,000/-. There is no reply from any one of them or refunded the said amount. Hence the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service and the complainant filed this complaint seeking various reliefs.        

4. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE  1^st  OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

          There is no privity of contract between the complainant and this opposite party. The complainant never paid any money to this opposite party. This opposite party is not a principal to the 2^nd opposite party. Their relationship is only principal to principal basis and this opposite party never an agent of the 2^nd opposite party. Further the 2^nd opposite party paid a sum of Rs.15,000/- by way of cheque to the complainant and the same was credited in the complainant account. Hence, this complaint has he merits and prays to dismiss the complaint with costs.

 

 

5. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE  2^nd   OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

          This opposite party paid a sum of Rs.15,000/- to the complainant by way of cheque and the same has been credited to the complainant’s account on 05.10.2015 and in such circumstances nothing survives in this complaint. The 2^nd opposite party on receiving the exchange vehicle will repair the vehicle to its road worthy and after which the vehicle is put to sale and after selling change the name in the  RTO in the RC book and this process takes 2-3 months to complete it. However, in the mean time the complainant filed this frivolous complaint.

          6. The complainant cannot feign ignorant of the fact, as he was very much informed about the same during booking of the vehicle i.e, the above said discount will be given only upon submission of delivery documents to the 1^st opposite party and it was abundantly made clear that the said process shall take 2 to 3 months time, hence the complainant overlooking all these aspects cannot point fingers at this point of time and come forward with the present complaint by making baseless allegations. The 2^nd opposite party states that on receipt of Rs.15,000/- from the 1^st opposite party, they had immediately informed the complainant and requested him to collect the payment. The complainant refused to receive the cheque by demanding interest for a sum of Rs.15,000/- till the date of disbursal. Hence this opposite party has not committed any deficiency in service and prays to dismiss the complaint with costs.

7. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

 

8. POINT NO :1 

          The admitted facts are that the 1^st opposite party is the manufacturer of the Chevrolet Car and the 2^nd opposite party is the dealer and the complainant purchased a  Chevrolet Spark LT Car from the 2^nd opposite party during October 2012 by exchanging his Santro Car and  the price of the car is fixed at Rs.4,05,000/-  after deducting the Exchange Bonus of Rs.15,000/- and the complainant  paid Rs.1,05,000/- on 10.10.2012 and Rs.3,00,000/- on 11.10.2012 and she took delivery of the car on 12.10.2012 and further on 14.10.2012 at request of Mrs.Lakshmi Priya of 2^nd opposite party, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.15,000/- to him and he assured by  writing in Ex.A3 Exchange Bonus letter that the amount will be refunded earliest and however even after writing Ex.A6, Ex.A7 letters and Ex.A10 notice the opposite parties have not refunded the amount till filing of the complaint.

          9. Admittedly the 2^nd opposite party paid the said sum of Rs.15,000/- towards exchange bonus on 05.10.2015 after filing of this complaint in respect of the 1^st prayer. The complainant took delivery of the car on 12.10.2012 and on the same day the said amount of Rs.15,000/- paid to 2^nd opposite party under Ex.A3 assuring to refund the amount earliest. The 2^nd opposite party’s case in his written version is that he has to repair and sell the exchange vehicle and to change the RC book and these process would take 2 – 3 months and in the mean time the complainant filed the complaint and further he had refunded and credited the amount in the complainant’s account on 05.10.2015 and therefore the 2^nd opposite party has not committed any deficiency in service.

          10. The complainant took delivery of the vehicle on 12.10.2012 and also paid Rs.15,000/- on the same day. The 2^nd opposite party said the process to sell the exchange vehicle would take 2-3 months. Further on the date of filing of the complaint on 16.07.2015, the amount was not paid to the complainant. Nearly, after 2 years 9 months only the 2^nd opposite party paid the exchange bonus amount to the complainant. Even before filing the complaint, he sent letter on 25.06.2013 (Ex.A6) &  on 2.12.2014 (Ex.A7) to pay the amount and also issued Ex.A10 legal notice dated 24.03.2015 demanding payment; the 2^nd opposite party was negligent and did not pay the amount. Therefore, after filing the complaint the 2^nd opposite party paid the amount irresistibly leads to the conclusion that the 2^nd opposite party committed deficiency in service.

          11. As for as the 1^st opposite party is concerned, he is only a manufacturer and he has no privity of contract between him and the complainant. The exchange of vehicle and bonus dealt by only the 2^nd opposite party and the 1^st opposite party never involved in that transaction. Therefore, we hold that the 1^st opposite party has not committed deficiency in service and however, it is held that the 2^nd opposite party has committed deficiency in service .

12. POINT NO:2

          Though the 2^nd opposite party is found that as he committed deficiency in service, he paid the exchange bonus amount after filing of the complaint. Hence in this respect the prayer sought by the complaint goes.

          13. The complainant sought compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- for mental agony. Due to deficiency in service, the complainant suffered with mental agony is accepted. Without any valid reason the 2^nd opposite party retained the exchange bonus amount more than 2 ½  years is an unfair trade practice. Therefore, it would be appropriate to direct the 2^nd opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation to the complainant would meet ends of justice, besides a sum of Rs.5,000/-  litigation expenses. The complaint in respect of the 1^st opposite party is liable to be dismissed.

          In the result the Complaint is partly allowed. The 2^nd Opposite Party is ordered to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand  only) towards compensation for mental agony, besides a sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only)  towards litigation expenses. The complaint in respect  of the 1^st opposite party and other reliefs are dismissed.

The above amount shall be paid to the complainant within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest till the date of payment.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 28^th day of November 2017.

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 10.10.2012                   Receipt bearing No.001941

Ex.A2 dated 11.10.2012                   Receipt bearing No.001946

Ex.A3 dated 12.10.2012                   Exchange Bonus Offer Letter

Ex.A4 dated 15.10.2012                   Receipt bearing No.001966

Ex.A5 dated 10.12.2012                   Tax Invoice bearing Invoice No.T00484

Ex.A6 dated 25.06.2013                   Letter sent by the complainant

Ex.A7 dated 02.12.2014                   Letter sent by the complainant

Ex.A8 dated NIL                     Postal Acknowledgements

Ex.A9 dated 11.12.2014                   Reply Letter sent by the opposite party

Ex.A10 dated 24.03.2015                 Legal Notice sent by Registered post

Ex.A11 dated 24.03.2015                 Postal Receipts and Acknowledgements              

LIST OF DOCUMENT FILED BY THE 1^st OPPOSITE PARTY :

 

Ex.B1 dated NIL                     Relevant extracts from the dealership agreement  

                                                     entered between the 1^st opposite party & the 2^nd  

                                                     opposite party.

 

 

LIST OF DOCUMENT FILED BY THE 2^nd  OPPOSITE PARTY :

 

                                                …… NIL ……

 

 

 

 MEMBER – I                                                              PRESIDENT