Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/312/2017

Madhu Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

Pioneer Toyota C/o EM PEE Motors Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Ravinder Pal Singh

10 Apr 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

 

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/312/2017
Date of Institution	:	11/04/2017
Date of Decision	:	10/04/2018

 

 

Madhu Gupta w/o Sh. Akshaya Kumar r/o H.No.G-5, Sector 14, Punjab University, Chandigarh

… Complainant

V E R S U S

Pioneer Toyota c/o Em Pee Moors Limited, Plot No.177 H & I, Industrial Area, Phase – I, Chandigarh through its Proprietor.

… Opposite Party

 

CORAM :	SHRI RATTAN SINGH THAKUR	PRESIDENT
	MRS. SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SHRI SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

 

                                                             

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Ravinder Pal Singh, Counsel for complainant
	:	Sh. Gaurav Bhardwaj, Counsel for OP.

Per Rattan Singh Thakur, President

1.         Allegations, in brief are, complainant had booked a Toyota Innova Crysta car with the OP on 11.10.2016 by paying advance of Rs.1,00,000/-. The price of the car was told to be Rs.15,85,847/- including VAT and cess on VAT and after allowing discount of Rs.27,826/-. On 13.10.2016, the complainant was asked by the OP to take delivery. When the complainant visited the OP to take delivery, she was shocked to see that the car was having temporary number of Punjab and had already covered distance of 73 kms.  Upon enquiry, the complainant was told that the car was booked by some other person and since he was having some financial issues, he was not ready to take delivery.  The OP also offered a discount of Rs.5,000/- on the extra accessories. The complainant reluctantly agreed accepted the delivery.  Later on, the matter was agitated.  On these averments, the complainant prayed for refund of Rs.2,315/- overcharged from her alongwith interest, discount on accessories, compensation and litigation expenses.
2.         OP contested the consumer complaint, filed written statement and, inter alia, raised preliminary objections of complaint being not maintainable. Rest of the allegations were denied. However, it was claimed that after calculation, a sum of Rs.2,315/-  was fairly due to the complainant payable by the OPs which the OP is ready to return and cheque has been issued. On these lines, the cause is sought to be defended.
3.         Rejoinder filed by the complainant and facts mentioned in the consumer complaint were reiterated.
4.         Parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
5.         We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and gone through the record of the case.  Our findings are as under :-
6.         Allegations were made, Punjab temporary registration number for the vehicle was supplied and VAT, if lower than Punjab at Chandigarh was to be charged. We shall refer here with regard to the vehicle covered mileage of 73 Kms. and having temporary Punjab number, facts were known to the complainant.  However, this was candidly accepted.  Under this situation, if she was not a consenting party for the purchase of such like car, then she could have refused the delivery.  It is highly unbelievable that a purchaser will not be aware of such like facts particularly so when it is not the allegation that the complainant is an illiterate person. The basic concept of consumer law is from business to consumer. The complainant herself being a consumer had accepted and claimed that discount was assured, but, there is no such document that discount was ever assured.  Rather a counter affidavit has been filed.  These allegations are not trustworthy except the fact that an amount of Rs.2,315/- was overcharged by the OP, which is its admission in the written statement and the OP has prepared the cheque for the same. 
7.         Therefore, after appraisal of the material on record, the present consumer complaint is partly allowed. The OP is directed as under:-

1. To immediately refund the overcharged amount of Rs.2,315/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum w.e.f. 13.10.2016 (i.e. the date of payment) till realization;
2. To pay Rs.5,000/- to the complainant as compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and harassment caused to her;
3. To pay to the complainant Rs.5,000/- as costs of litigation.

8.         This order be complied with by the OP within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, it shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
9.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
10/04/2018	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[Surjeet Kaur]	[Rattan Singh Thakur]
hg	Member	Member	President