Complaint Case No. CC/184/2022 | ( Date of Filing : 19 Jul 2022 ) |
| | 1. Sri. Vivek Alahari, | S/o Ramaprasad Rao, Aged about 35 years, R/ at No.92, Sapthagiri, 2nd Floor, 8th A cross, Manjunatha Layout, Munnekolala Near, Samruddi Medicals, Marathalli, Bangalore. |
| ...........Complainant(s) | |
Versus | 1. OLA Electric Technologies Pvt., Ltd., | Regent Insignia, 17th Main, 100 Feet Road, Koramanagala, Bangalore. | 2. The Secretary, | State Transport Authority, Koramangala, Bangalore. |
| ............Opp.Party(s) |
|
|
Final Order / Judgement | Date of Filing:16.07.2022 Date of Disposal:18.04.2023 BEFORE THE IV ADDL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION BENGALURU 1ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027. PRESENT:- Hon’ble Sri.Ramachandra M.S., B.A., LL.B., President Sri.Chandrashekar S Noola., B.A., Member Smt.Nandini H Kumbhar, B.A., LL.B., LL.M., Member | ORDERC.C.No.184/2022 Order dated this the 18th day of April 2023 | Sri Vivek Alahari, S/o Ramaprasad Rao, Aged about 35 years, R/a No.92, Sapthagiri, 2nd floor, 8th A cross, Manjunatha layout, Munnekolala, Near Samruddi Medicals, Marathahalli, Bengaluru (Smt.Nagaveni.G.H.,Adv., ) | COMPLAINANT/S | - V/S – | - OLA Electric Technologies Pvt. Ltd.,
Regent Insignia, 17th Main, 100 ft.road, Kormangala, (Sri Mohan Malge, Adv.,) - The secretary,
State Transport Authority, | OPPOSITE PARTY/S |
ORDER SRI RAMACHANDRA.M.S, PRESIDENT - The complainant files a complaint with this Commission under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act of 2019 with a direction to OP to pay Rs.25,000/- which was paid towards the fancy number and award compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- for deficiency in service and for causing mental agony and harassment and loss to the complainant and such other reliefs.
- The following are the complaint's key facts:
The complainant had purchased electric vehicle from the OP for a sum of Rs.1,65,549/- bearing registration No.KA-03 KJ-9636 from OP-1. At the time of purchase the complainant was very much interested to have fancy number to the said vehicle. In order to get the same, the complainant has paid additional sum of Rs.25,000/- to the OP-2 and OP-2 being the transport department have also issued receipt for being received the said amount. - It is the case of the complainant that on 18.12.2022 the complainant received call from OP-1 for registration of the vehicle and it was intimated to them that as he has interest to take fancy number and he requested the OP-1 not to register the same. In spite of that OP-1 has processed and they have registered the complainant vehicle with registration bearing No.KA-03 KJ-9636. As the complainant was interested to take fancy number for the vehicle KA-03-KK-0003. In the mean time it is alleged by the complainant that OP-1 has failed to follow up the request of the complainant and despite of the request from the complainant. Even though paying sum of Rs.25,000/- to get fancy number, the OP-1 has failed to render appropriate service in order to get fancy number of the complainant vehicle. This being the act and attitude of the OP-1 as they have negligently and carelessly handled the issue of the complainant to get fancy number of the vehicle. This attitude and action attracts clearly in deficiency of service on their part. It is also observed that OP-1 being dealer has failed to look after the demand of the complainant and there by they have committed great error while discharging their duties. The act of the OP-1 could be termed as deficiency of service on their part. For which they are held liable to pay the claim of the complainant along with other reliefs, the complainant was forced to file the present complaint sought for relief for refund of entire amount and such other reliefs.
- Notice to OP-1 & 2 duly served. OP-2 remained absent and has been placed ex-parte. Even though OP-1 represented by the counsel, they have not chosen to file version statement and affidavit and it is taken as not filed on the file of the complainant.
- The complainant filed chief-examination affidavit along with relevant documents in support of his contention.
- Heard arguments. The matter is reserved for order.
- The points that arise for our consideration are;
- Whether the Complainant prove that there is deficiency of service on the part of the OPs as alleged in the complaint and thereby prove that he is entitle for the relief sought?
- What order?
- The findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : Affirmative Point No.2 : As per final order REASONS - POINT NO.1:- From the perusal of the complaint, chief-examination affidavit and also examination of the annexure documents produced, it is found that the complainant had purchased electric vehicle from the OP for a sum of Rs.1,65,549/- bearing registration No.KA-03 KJ-9636 from OP-1. At the time of purchase the complainant was very much interested to have fancy number to the said vehicle. In order to get the same, the complainant has paid additional sum of Rs.25,000/- to the OP-2 and OP-2 being the transport department have also issued receipt for being received the said amount.
- It is the case of the complainant that on 18.12.2022 the complainant received call from OP-1 for registration of the vehicle and it was intimated to them that as he has interest to take fancy number and he requested the OP-1 not to register the same. In spite of that OP-1 has processed and they have registered the complainant vehicle with registration bearing No.KA-03 KJ-9636. As the complainant was interested to take fancy number for the vehicle KA-03-KK-0003. In the mean time it is alleged by the complainant that OP-1 has failed to follow up the request of the complainant and despite of the request from the complainant. Even though paying sum of Rs.25,000/- to get fancy number, the OP-1 has failed to render appropriate service in order to get fancy number of the complainant vehicle. This being the act and attitude of the OP-1 as they have negligently and carelessly handled the issue of the complainant to get fancy number of the vehicle. This attitude and action attracts clearly in deficiency of service on their part. It is also observed that OP-1 being dealer has failed to look after the demand of the complainant and there by they have committed great error while discharging their duties. The act of the OP-1 could be termed as deficiency of service on their part. For which they are held liable to pay the claim of the complainant along with other reliefs.
- The complaint against OP-2, the Registering Authority, Government of Karnataka, they have no role to play in this complaint and complainant has not made any allegations and no reliefs is claimed against them. Such being the case, the complaint against OP-2 is liable to be dismissed.
- In view of the discussion and on perusal of the complaint averments and the contention of the parties, it is held that the OP-1 is liable to refund a sum of Rs.25,000/- along with other reliefs granted in the complaint. In view of the above discussion, the Point No.1 we answer Partly in Affirmative.
- POINT NO.2:- In the result, we passed the following:
ORDER - Complaint is allowed in part.
- The OP-1 is directed to refund Rs.25,000/- along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of payment till refund is made to the complainant.
- The OP-1 further directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for deficiency and a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation charges. OP-1 fails to comply the order within 45 days from the date of order, compensation amount and cost of litigation shall carry interest at 6% p.a. for non-compliance of the order from the date of order till payment is made.
- Complaint against OP-2 is hereby dismissed.
- Furnish free copy of this order to both the parties.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the Open Commission on 18th April 2023) (RAMACHANDRA M.S.) PRESIDENT (NANDINI H KUMBHAR) (CHANDRASHEKAR S.NOOLA) MEMBER MEMBER Witness examined on behalf of the complainant by way of affidavit: Sri Vivek Alahari-who being the complainant Documents produced by the complainant:
1. | C-1: Copy of the OLA Electric Tax and Invoice dt.28.01.2022. | 2. | C-2: Copy of the DD dt.11.02.2022 vide DD No.019454 drawn on SBI | 3. | C-3: Copy of receipt dt.29.01.2022 | 4. | C-4:Copy of Inspection certificate issued by approved dealer dt.28.01.2022. | 5. | C-5: Copy of Pollution certificate | 6. | C-6: Copy of Form No.21. | 7. | C-7: Copy of certificate of Inspection of vehicle | 8. | C-8: Copy of Form-20 | 9. | C-9: Copy of Form-19 | 10 | C-10:Copy of payment of tax. | 11 | C-11:Copy of disclaimer dt.07.02.2022 | 12 | C-12: Copy of advance number fee receipt issued by Transport Department, Karnataka | 13 | C-13:Copy of conversation of WhatsApp | 14 | C-14: Copy of legal notice dt.19.05.2022. | 15 | C-15: Postal receipts (02 No.) | 16 | C-16: Acknowledgement | 17 | C-17: Email conversation | 18 | C-18: Copy of Aadhar card of complainant |
Witness examined on behalf of the OP by way of affidavit: Nil Documents produced by the OP: Nil
(RAMACHANDRA M.S.) PRESIDENT (NANDINI H KUMBHAR) (CHANDRASHEKAR S.NOOLA) MEMBER MEMBER SKA* | |