Orissa

Cuttak

CC/138/2015

Dhirendra Nath Mallick - Complainant(s)

Versus

Pramod Kumar Rath - Opp.Party(s)

B P Tripathy

24 Aug 2017

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK.

C.C No.138/2015

 

Dhirendra Nath Mallick,

At: Qr. No.B/440,Sec-3,

Nalco Township,PO/PS:Damanjodi,

Dist:Koraput.                                                                             .… Complainant.

 

Vrs.

Pramod Kumar Rath,Proprietor,

Padma Motors Pvt. Ltd.,

Pratap Nagari,NH-5,Cuttack,

Dist:Cuttack.                                                                                  … Opp. Party.

 

Present:               Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,President.

Sri Bichitrananda Tripathy, Member.

Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member (W).

 

Date of filing:    07.12.2015

Date of Order:  24.08.2017

 

For the complainant  :    Sri B.P.Tripathy,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps.                :   None.

 

Smt. Sarmistha Nath,Member(W).

 

                The complainant has filed this complaint before the Forum against the O.P alleging therein deficiency in service and unfair trade practice adopted y the O.P.

1. The case of the complainant in brief is that he purchased a Ford Fiesta Classic 1.4(Diesel) Car from O.P No.1, Padma Motors Pvt. Ltd. on 04.01.2013 bearing Registration No.OD-02D-8060.  Copies of the R.C.Book and driving license are annexure-1 & 2.  On 15.06.2016 while the complainant was travelling from Bhubaneswar to Damanjodi in the aforesaid vehicle, the vehicle did not run at Balugaon, thereafter the complainant intimated to the service manager of Padma Motors Pvt. Ltd. for further assistance.

The Service Manager and their associate’s advice the complainant to get the vehicle back to the show room/work shop for recourse action.  The vehicle was towed to the work shop; it was found that the oil pan and strainer of the vehicle were damaged as a result the engine got seized.  After verification the O.P informed the complainant there the repair work will involve a huge sum of money and gave an estimation of the work to be Rs.1,06,868/- only(the copy of estimation annexure-3).

After receiving the estimation slip from the O.P the complainant requested the O.P not to undertake the repair work as it involves such a huge amount of money.  But the O.P informed that the vehicle is still under warranty and persuaded the complainant to replace the items and get the vehicle repair at the cost of the company. (Copy of general warranty cover provided by the company). (Annexure-4).

The complainant agreed to get the vehicle repaired at the workshop of the O.P upon his assurance but the O.P raised an invoice of amount Rs.94,000/- against the repair work on the ground that the damage was not covered under warranty and the complainant had to bear such expenses.

The complainant enquired about the said repair work with other mechanics and came to know that the cost of repair was not more than Rs.50,000/-.  The complainant further alleged that the conduct of the O.P amounts to deficiency in service which caused serious harassment and mental agony to the complainant.  Finding no other way, the complainant has taken shelter of this Hon’ble Forum.  He has prayed for a direction to O.Ps for refund of the total repair amount along with interest and to pay Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and harassment and Rs.10,000/- towards cost of litigation.

2. The O.P. though appeared through their advocate but did not file any written version nor placed their argument, so they were set exparte.
3. We have heard the complainant at length and went through the documents and papers filed by the complainant.    The O.P. did not participate in the hearing nor submitted Anaya written brief for which we are constrained to admit the uncontroverted allegations,statements of the complainant.  It is found from the documents submitted by the complainant that the repair work was conducted during the warranty period but the O.P has charged an inflated bills towards repair of the vehicle which should have been repaired by the O.Ps free of cost rather the O.Ps adopted wrong means by demanding huge amount for repair of the vehicle.

In view of the above discussion, the O.Ps are found deficient in rendering service which amounts to unfair trade practice.

                                                                                EXPARTE ORDER

                The O.Ps are directed to refund the total repair amount of the vehicle to the complainant to the tune of Rs.94,000/-. The O.Ps will also to pay Rs.10.000/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards litigation cost.

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble Member in the Open Court on this the 11^th    day of July,2017  under the seal and signature of this Forum.

 

  ( Smt. Sarmistha Nath )

                        Member (W)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       (Sri D.C.Barik)

                                                                                                               President.

                                                                                                    (Sri B.N.Tripathy )

                                                                                                              Member