O R D E R
Sri.NishadThankappan (Member II):
Shri.Rajesh.K.T has filed this complaint before the Commission U/s 35 of the C.PAct 2019 with request to getting relief from the opposite party.
2. The case of the complainant is as follows:- The complainant is an agent of Sabari milk and he is earning his lively hood by supplying milk to various retailers. For that purpose the complainant booked a Bolero City Pick up Van with the opposite party by paying Rs. 3,000/- as advance booking charge in the 1st march of July 2020 and thereafter on 15/07/2020 he applied for a loan in Mahindra Financial service ltd for purchasing the vehicle. And the loan was sanctioned by the above firm in 15/07/2020. Then as per the direction of the opposite party, the complainant has further paid of Rs. 10000/- through Federal Bank Ezhumattur Branch on 17/07/2020. And on 21/07/2020 the Mahindra Financial service Ltd credited the 7.5 Lakhs to the account of opposite party. And on 27/07/2020 the opposite party informed the complainant the vehicle was ready for delivery within five days and as per the direction complainant further paid Rs. 32,450/- as balance price for the vehicle. But the opposite party did not deliver the vehicle as promised by them. And on 26/08/2020 as per the direction of opposite party, the complainant took the insurance policy of the vehicle and on 27/08/2020 he got the temporary permit but the opposite party failed to deliver the vehicle in time. They purposefully delayed delivery of the vehicle .thereby the complainant sustained much difficulties and damages. The vehicle was delivered by the opposite party on 14/09/2020.Due to the above the complainant alleged that he has caused a loss of Rs.17,700/-as interest on the loan amount of the 8 lakhs. According to the complainant opposite party ought to have to delivered the vehicle 01/08/2020. But the vehicle was delivered only on 14/09/2020. Due to the above delay complainant has constrained to hire a vehicle for his milk supply by paying Rs.3000/- per day as rent. Thereby it is alleged that he sustained a loss of Rs. 1,30,000/- as rent for hired vehicle for 41 days. Due to the non -delivery of the vehicle in time, the complainant could not pay the 1st installment in time. Thereby the complainant to pay Rs.8800/-as interest of the above default.it was also caused due to the latches of opposite party. Hence the complainant claimed that he is entitled to get compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- for his mental agony. Thereby he filed the above complaint before the commission.
3. Notice was issued to opposite party. The opposite party not turned up before the commission and did not file any version. . Due to the non-appearance of the opposite party, he was set ex-parte on 03/02/2021.
4. Considering the contentions raised by the complainant, this commission raised the following issues for consideration.
- Whether there is any negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?.
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any compensation as prayed for?
- Relief and Cost
5. Issue No: 1 to 3:-Complainant filed proof affidavit in support of the complaint and5 documents produced in evidence and that were marked as Exhibit A1 to A5. We perusing the complainant, proof affidavit and supporting documents in evidence the complainant succeeded in proving his case.All the allegations leveled against the opposite party is remained unchallenged. Then the available evidence it can be seen the opposite party is failed deliver the vehicle to the complainant in time. Thereby the opposite party committed gross negligence, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Since there is deficiency is service and negligent on the part of the opposite party by way of purposeful denial of delivery of vehicle, to the complainant. The unfair trade practice of the opposite party is to be answerable to the complainant. Considering the whole aspects of this case, we are fully convinced that the allegation put forward by the complainant against the opposite party is highly genuine. And on over all reading of the entire facts and circumstances of this case we are of the strong view that complaint is to be allowed.
6. In the result, for the ends of justice for the gross negligence and deficiency in service committed by the opposite party, the opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) to the complainant as compensation for mental agony caused to the complainant by the act of the opposite party. We further direct the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.1,58,500/-(Rupees One Lakhs Fifty Eight Thousand Five Hundred only) to the complainant as loss caused to the complainant by the act of the opposite party and pay an amount of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) to the complainant as the cost of this proceedings. We direct the opposite party to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
Complaint allowed
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed and typed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 15thday of March, 2021.
(Sd/-)
Sri.NishadThankappan
(Member-II)
Sri. George Baby(President) : (Sd/-)
Smt. N. ShajithaBeevi (Member-I) : (Sd/-)
Witness examined on the side of the complainant:
PW1Rajesh K.T
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:
A1: Photocopy of the receipt dated: 17/07/2020.
A2: Photocopy of the receipt dated: 27/07/2020.
A3: Copy of repayment summary dated: 30/10/2020.
A4: copy of the insurance policy dated: 27/08/2020.
A5: copy of the temporary certificate of registration dated: 28/08/2020.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties:Nil.
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties: Nil.
Copy to:- (1) Rajesh K.T,
KudappanakkalVeedu,
Vaipoor P.O, Kottangal Village,
Mallappally.
(2) The Manger,
Pothens Auto Pvt. Ltd.,
Door No.XI 685A, Opp. Jama Masjid,
Thattamala.P.O, Kollam – 691020.
(3) The Stock File.
