Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/188/2016

Mr.P.Sarguru,S/o.Palanivelu - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.MPL Automobile Agency (P) LTD - Opp.Party(s)

A.Thirumaran

03 Jun 2022

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (NORTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.

 

       PRESENT : THIRU. G. VINOBHA, M.A., B.L.,                          :PRESIDENT

                                         TMT. KAVITHA KANNAN, M.E.,                         : MEMBER-I

                                         THIRU.V.RAMAMURTHY,B.A.,B.L.,PGDLA.,    :MEMBER-II

 

TUESDAY THE 17^TH  DAY OF MAY 2022

C.M.P.109/2018 in C.C. NO.188/2016

 

 

 

Mr.P.Sarguru, M/A-42 years,

S/o.N.Palanivelu,

Old.No.546, New No.16,

Vandikaran street,

Chennai-600 042                                                                                                                                          

                                                                   …....Petitioner/ Complainant

 

                                                   / verus/

1.M/s.MPL Automobiles Agency (P)Ltd.,

Represented by its Authorised Signatory,

Ampa Manor, No.107/1 Nelson  Manickam Road,

Amindakarai,

Chennai-600 029.

 

2. M/s.Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.,

Represented by its Aurhtorised Signatory,

Gateway Building,

Apollo Bunder, Mumbai 400 039.

 

3. M/s.Zulaikha Motors P Ltd.,

Represented by its Authorised Signatory,

No.10/8(SP), 3^rd Main Road,

Ambattur Industrial Estate,

Chennai 600 058.

 

4. M/s.T.V Sundaram Iyengar & Sons P Ltd.,

Rep by its Authorised Signatory,

No.141, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, (OMR)

Chennai 600 041.

                                                                      ……Respondent/Opposite party

 

Date of petition                                                           : 24.09.2018

Counsel for Petitioner/ Complainant                        : Mr.A.Thirumaran

Counsel for 2^nd Respondent/2^nd Opposite party          :M/s.Surana & Surana and              

    another

 

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU: THIRU. G. VINOBHA, M.A., B.L.,

          This petition is filed by the petitioner/complainant to receive the additional documents filed along with the petition and to mark the same on the complainant side.

1.The petitioner/complainant filed the main complaint to return a sum Rs.10,71,438/- towards the cost of the vehicle and or to provide a new vehicle and also claimed a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- as compensation for mental agony.  The complaint was filed in year 2016.  After filing of written version by the opposite party the present petition is filed by the petitioner/complainant on 24.09.2018 to receive seven documents as additional documents on the complainant side,  by alleging that even after the filing of complaint the vehicle purchased by him was having manufacturing defects and the vehicle was experiencing problem and to prove the same, the repair order and repair invoice of the 4^th Respondent and the letter given by the 4^th respondent in the year 2017-18 along with other documents were filed to substantiate the complainants case that there is manufacturing defects in the vehicle. 

2.The 2^nd respondent/opposite party alone has filed counter.  1^st respondent/opposite party endorsed no counter.  3^rd & 4^th respondent/opposite party has not filed counter.

3.In the counter filed by the 2^nd respondent/opposite party it was contended that after filing written version by the 2^nd respondent/opposite party.  This application is filed with malafide intention to mislead the court and further contended that the repair order invoices and manual repair form has been filed belatedly to drag on the case.

4.This petition to receive the additional documents is filed by the petitioner/complainant along with seven documents in the year 2018. Already at the time of filling of complaint in 2016 the complainant has filed 22 documents  and now this petition is filed  when the matter is posted for filling proof affidavit of complainant.  Till this date no documents were marked on both side.  According to the petitioner/complainant these additional documents were necessary to prove his case and these documents were subsequent to the filling of the complaint.  But, on the other hand the 2^nd respondent/opposite party contended that these documents are filed at belated stage and the documents were not legible and clear and further it is filed to drag on the proceedings.  Since, this petition is filed by the petitioner/complainant even prior to marking of documents on the complainant side and since these documents are subsequent to filling of complaint and the documents filed related to service provided to the complainant’s vehicle the above said documents are necessary to substantiate the case of the complaint. Therefore the petitioner must be given an opportunity to file those documents.  But, since the documents were filed belatedly the petitioner/ complainant is directed to pay cost to the 2^nd respondent/2^nd opposite party.

Hence, this petition is ordered to be allowed on payment of cost of  Rs.1000/- by the petitioner/complainant to the 2^nd respondent/opposite party on or before 02.06.2022.Call on 03.06.2022.

 Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by him corrected and pronounced by us on this 17^th day of   May  2022.

 

MEMBER – I             MEMBER – II                                   PRESIDENT

         

CMP.NO.109/2018 IN CC.188/2016 DATED:17.05.2022   ORDER PRONOUNCED,                In the result, this petition is ordered to be allowed on payment of cost of  Rs.1000/-(Rupees Thousand only) by the petitioner/complainant to the 2nd respondent/2nd opposite party on or before 02.06.2022. Call on 03.06.2022.     MEMBER – I  MEMBER – II                  PRESIDENT