Kerala

StateCommission

A/08/7

M/s.K.T.C Automobiles Pvt Ltd - Complainant(s)

Versus

O.V.Pathrose - Opp.Party(s)

Shyam Padman

29 Aug 2008

ORDER


.
CDRC, Sisuvihar Lane, Sasthamangalam.P.O, Trivandrum-10
Appeal(A) No. A/08/7

E.R.Mridhul
M/s.K.T.C Automobiles Pvt Ltd		 ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

O.V.Pathrose		 ...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU 2. SMT.VALSALA SARNGADHARAN 3. SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
1. E.R.Mridhul 2. M/s.K.T.C Automobiles Pvt Ltd

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. O.V.Pathrose

For the Appellant :
1. 2. Shyam Padman

For the Respondent :
1.



ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, VAZHUTHACAD, THIRUVANANTHPAURAM
FA.7/2008
Judgment dated: 29.8.08
PRESENT
 
JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU                            : PRESIDENT
SMT.VALSALA SARANGADHARAN                                  : MEMBER
SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA                                                 : MEMBER
 
1. M/s K.T.C.Automobiles Pvt.Ltd.,                          : APPELLANTS
   YMCA Road, Kozhikode.
2. E.R.Mridhul,
    Sales Consultant,
    KTC Automobiles Pvt.Ltd.,
    26/190(1)Vithuni Road, Palakkad. 
(By Adv.Shyam Padman)
                Vs.
O.V.Pathrose,                                                        : RESPONDENT
S/o Late O.P.Varkey,
Ovungamalil House,
PO Koranchira,
Konnackal Kadave, Kizhakkenchery,
Alathur Taluk, Palakkad.
(By Adv.James.O.C)
 
JUDGMENT
 
JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU   : PRESIDENT
 
 
The appellants are the opposite parties in CC.121/06 in the file of CDRF, Palakkad. The matter is with respect to an exchange scheme offered by the opposite parties, as per which an additional amount of Rs.10000/- exchange bonus was provided vide advertisement marked Ext.A5. The benefit was denied on the ground that the RC owner of the vehicle is not the same person who purchased the new car and also on the ground that the documents were not produced within the period of 60 days. It is also contended by the appellant that the scheme is that of the manufacturer and that the opposite party is only the dealer and that he can not be made liable in the absence of the manufacturer. The manufacturer has not been made a party.
The records were called for. On a perusal of the records we find that as per Ext.A6 order booking form the opposite party has undertaken that the exchange bonus will be supplied within a period of two months.   The same is signed by the 2nd opposite party the official of the 1st opposite party. We find that the finding of the Forum that after accepting the old vehicle and selling the new vehicle the objections raised thereafter amounts to unfair trade practice. We fully endorsed the findings of the Forum. We find that there is no merit in the appeal filed. Appeal is dismissed in limine.
 
JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU                            : PRESIDENT
 
 
SMT.VALSALA SARANGADHARAN                                  : MEMBER
 
 
SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA                                                 : MEMBER
 
 
 



......................JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU
......................SMT.VALSALA SARNGADHARAN
......................SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA