By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President:

 

            The complainant’s case is as follows. The complainant came across a general offer in the Mathrubhoomi daily dated 18.12.05 that New C.G.1000 three wheeler for a price of Rs.14,592/-. When the price quoted was very much specific, the complainant went and met the first respondent at their office. The first respondent told the complainant that the price shown in the Mathrubhoomi was just merely and indicative price only to solicit innocent and gullible buyers and at the price shown in the advertisement they won’t sell. When the complainant insisted upon the delivery of the vehicle for the price indicated they refused to deliver the vehicle. There upon notice was sent to the respondents to go by the offer. But they refused to reply to the notice dt. 19.12.05 though they acknowledged the notice on 21.12.05. Hence this complaint.

 

            2. In the counter the respondents stated that there was no general offer in the Mathrubhoomi daily as stated by the complainant. It is false to say that the petitioner met the respondent and made known his purpose. The respondent further denied the entire allegations in the complaint and states that complainant is not a consumer and he has not paid any amount towards the purchase of the vehicle. There has been no offer or acceptance between petitioner and respondent. The advertisement clearly shows that there are certain conditions that follow in order to get this vehicle at the price shown in the advertisement. The cost price of this vehicle is Rs.1,18,000/-. The petitioner has to submit necessary securities with proper sureties to the satisfaction of respondent in order to avail this facility. In the advertisement by the side of the amount shown is a star and this star has been explained as “conditions apply”. The petitioner is not entitled to get any relief. Hence prays to dismiss the complaint. 

 

            3. The points for consideration are:

 

(1)   Is there any unfair trade practice?

(2)   If so, reliefs and costs.

 

            4. The evidence consists of Exts. P1 to P4.

 

            5. Points: This complaint is filed against the unfair trade practice alleged to be committed by the complainant. According to the complainant, he had approached the respondent for purchase of the vehicle by attracting the Ext. P1 advertisement. So he was caused to send a lawyer notice. The notice was accepted by the respondent but no reply and no remedy. In the counter the respondent totally denied the case of complainant and stated that the advertisement clearly shows that there are certain other conditions to follow to get this vehicle at the price shown in the advertisement. The cost price of the vehicle is Rs.1,18,000/- and the complainant has to submit necessary securities with proper sureties to avail this facility. 

 

            6. The complainant has produced the daily to show the advertisement and marked as Ext. P1. We perused the Ext. P1 advertisement and seen the offer that a Bajaj new GC 1000 for Rs.14,592/- only inclusive of insurance, registration, road tax and fitness charge. So it is clear from the advertisement that the respondent is ready to deliver the vehicle for Rs.14,592/- only. In the counter the respondent stated that in the Ext. P1 by the side of the amount shown is a star and this star has been explained as “conditions apply”. The wordings “conditions apply” can be seen from a keen watching and not easily traceable. There is also no mention that the amount shown is only a down payment. So this is an unfair trade practice to cheat the consumers and is liable to be discouraged. There was no reply to Ext. P2 notice also.

 

            7. In the result, complaint is allowed and the respondent is directed to deliver the vehicle for the price stated in Ext. P1 advertisement. The respondent is further directed to pay to the complainant Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards cost of the litigation. Comply the order within one month.