Kerala

Kottayam

CC/08/279

Joshy.C.F - Complainant(s)

Versus

Propritor - Opp.Party(s)

29 Jan 2009

ORDER


Report
CDRF, Collectorate
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/279

Joshy.C.F
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Propritor
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Bindhu M Thomas 2. K.N Radhakrishnan 3. Santhosh Kesava Nath P

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




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.

 


 

The case of the complainant is as follows:

Complainant's Maruti Omini Van became breakdown at Kumaranalloor near Kottayam while he was travelling from Kottayam to Kozhikode along with his wife and child. He approached the mechanic one Mr.Anilkumar and entrusted the vehicle for repairs. The mechanic told that the defect in the vehicle was due to the complaint in the water pump and for rectification of the defects, the expenses for repairs was for Rs.3000/-. Further the complaint spent Rs.200/- for replacing the engine oil. Hence the words of the mechanic was believed by the complainant and the vehicle was entrusted with the opposite party for repairs. The complainant approached the opposite party for getting back the vehicle after repairs, the opposite party demanded Rs.7871/- as repair charges. The amount demanded by the opposite party was more than the amount actually they agreed. Complainant paid

 

-2-

Rs.7200/- to the opposite party as repairing charges. There was clear deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence this complaint.

Notice was served with the opposite party. They choosen to remain absent even after accepting the notice from this forum. Hence the opposite party set ex-partee.

The complainant examined as PW1. The document produced by him which was marked as exhibits A1 and A2.

Heard complainant. The case of the complainant is that the opposite party had collected more amount (ie.Rs.4000/-) from him as the opposite party admitted the repairing charges as agreed prior to the entrustment of the vehicle. The complainant produced A1 and A2 documents. A1 is the bill issued by the opposite party. A2 is the copy of the receipt issued by the maruti care centre. The case of the complainant stands un-challenged by the opposite party. So we have no reasons to dis-believe the case of the complainant. We are of the opinion that the case of the complainant is to be allowed.

In the result the complaint is allowed as follows: We direct the opposite party to refund Rs.4000/- to the complainant and pay Rs.1000/- as costs of these proceedings. The order shall be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.




......................Bindhu M Thomas
......................K.N Radhakrishnan
......................Santhosh Kesava Nath P