IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SONITPUR AT TEZPUR
District: Sonitpur
Present: Smti A. Devee
President,
District Consumer D.R Forum,
Sonitpur, Tezpur
Sri P.Das
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sonitpur
Smti S.Bora
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum,Sonitpur
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.10/2017
Sri Madhurya Baruah : Complainants
S/o Sri Pratap Baruah
Resident of Vill: Deka Baruah Chuburi
P.O: Tezpur,
Dist: Sonitpur, Assam
Vs.
1.Ramlal Durgadutt Motors Pvt Ltd. : Opp. party
NH 37 Nikamul Satra, Tezpur
Dist: Sonitpur, Assam
Appearance:
Sri Abhijit Kar, Advocate. : For the Complainant
Sri Sudesh Kr Singh, Advocate : For the Opp. party
Date of argument : 14-11-2017
Date of Judgment : 29-11-2017
1. The facts averred under the complaint, in brief, are that Complainant through payments made at various times paid a total sum of Rs.5,13,481/-to the opposite party in purchase of a Maruti Suzuki Wagon R VXI model vehicle against its Ex-showroom price of Rs.4,59,032/- with “Customer Docket” endorsement made by sales executive for eligibility of the Complainant to cash discount of Rs.15,000/- plus Accessories Rs.10,000/- plus ISL Rs.3000/-. But at
the time of delivery of the vehicle, complainant found price of the vehicle in the Tax invoice showing an amount of Rs.4,50,033/- only. On the otherhand the agreed registration process fees charged by the opposite party at Rs.25,431/- together with insurance charge of Rs.19,132/- that accounts for a total i.e, (Rs.450033+25431+19132)of Rs.4,94,596/-only has raised the curiosity to the complainant as to why at all the opposite party had realized Rs.5,13,481/- i.e., an excess of Rs.18,885/-. Allegedly on query to the person manning the counter nothing was replied to the Complainant. Complainant’s registered letter to the Regional office at Ulubari, Guwahati requesting a clarification was also allegedly given a deaf ear to following which, Complainant on 24-01 2017 served a notice of demand on the opposite party and its Regional office as well, when the same was responded showing the heads of defrayments in the expenses viz., Extended warranty, number plate of the vehicle and accessories which, however has been vehemently denied by the complainant of having ever availed of. Alleging that the opposite party have unjustly realized the said excess sum of Rs.18,885/- and had thus resorted to unfair trade practice, the Complainant is thus before the Forum praying relief of a total sum of Rs.78,885/-under different heads under the complaint as follows:
i)Excess amount charged :Rs.18,885/
ii)Compensation claimed for mental pain agony etc :Rs.50,000/-
iii)Cost and expenses :Rs.10,000/-
TOTAL :Rs.78,885/-
2. Opposite party contested the case by filing written version. To briefly state, the opposite party, citing chronological variance in the prices of vehicles, had stated that although the vehicle was booked by the complainant in the month of October, 2016 with the incentives as declared under Customer Docket at the time of booking, but the final payment having been made in November, 2016 the earlier incentive of free accessories valued at Rs.10,000/- had been reduced to Rs.7000/- by then. Likewise, showing various accounts under its written version, the opposite party averred that the incentives, advalorem under Customer Docket, having been adjusted against other parameters viz.Extended Warranty,Number plate and accessories, the notion of the complainant about excessive realization is nothing but a misunderstanding on the part of the Complainant. Denying any deficiency and or unfair trade practice, the opp. party has therefore, prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. Complainant tendered his evidence in chief on affidavit exhibiting as many as 09 documents thereunder. Opposite party declined to adduce evidence of any witness and preferred to remain content by cross-examining the complainant. On summon by the Forum the Accountant of the opposite party appeared and was examined as witness for the Forum during which Sales
Register of the opposite party was proved by the witness. The witness was cross-examined by the complainant.
We have carefully scrutinized the materials available on record inclusive of the written argument filed by the Complainant and draw up the following points for determination of the dispute.
POINTS FOR DETERMINATION
(i) Whether the opposite party has adopted unfair trade practice as alleged ?
ii)Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party ?
iii)Whether the Complainant is entitled to get any relief ?
DECISION ON THE POINTS WITH DISCUSSION
4.Point No.(i) & (ii) For convenience of discussion and also to avoid repetition, these Points are taken up together.The facts not in dispute are that the Complainant had purchased one Maruti Wagon R VXI vehicle from the opposite party and a total amount of Rs.5,13,481/- only was paid by the Complainant against price of the vehicle.
5. According to the Complainant, as found in his complaint and evidence on affidavit, price of the vehicle was Rs.4,94,596/- inclusive of registration fee of Rs.25,431/- and insurance charge of Rs.19,132/-. That means, Complainant was required to pay Rs.4,94,596/-only. But the opposite party realized an amount of Rs.18,885/- in excess from the Complainant. Complainant requested the opposite party through legal notice to explain the reason of excess amount charged.
6. A careful scrutiny of the documents reveals that the opposite party gave reply to the aforesaid notice through its advocate. Ext-9 is the said reply. As per Ext-9 price of the vehicle including all charges was as follows –
(i)Ex-show room price of the vehicle Rs. 450,033/-
(ii)Registration charges of the vehicle Rs. 25,432/-
(iii)Insurance Charges of the vehicle Rs. 19,132/-
(iv)Extended Warranty charges of the vehicle Rs. 6,083.50
(v)Number plate and labour charge Rs. 814/-
(vi)Accessories cum labour charges Rs. 12,000/-
Total Rs. 5,13,493.50
7. In support of its case opposite party has placed reliance on Sales register which is marked as Ext-“A”. In Ext “A” price of the vehicle including all charges is shown as follows –
Particulars | Sales | Receipt | Spot incentive |
Cost of vehicle | 475033/- | 20,000/-(2912) | |
Insurance | 19132/- | 463903/-(3265) | |
Registration | 26232/- | 5000/-(3360) | |
Extended Warranty | 6084/- | 24578(3364) | |
Consumer Promo | | 220000/- | |
Ist | | 3000/- | |
Total | 538481/- | 538481/- | |
| |
8. We have meticulously scrutinized the documents and found some discrepancies in the figure that appeared against price of the vehicle.As per Ext-1 dtd 29-11-2016 (Tax/vehicles & Charges Invoice) total assessable value of the vehicle with tax was Rs.450,033/-, As per Ext “A” cost of the vehicle was Rs.4,75,033/-. To clarify such discrepancies and arrive at just decision of the matters in controversy, the Accountant of the opposite party was examined as witness for the Forum. His evidence makes it abundantly clear that at the time of sale of the vehicle the Wagon R VXI model vehicle carried a total amount of Rs.25,000/- as Discount and Consumer Promo. The abovementioned Rs.25,000/- was not realized from the Complainant against price of the vehicle.
9. Regarding accessories of Rs.12,000/- the opposite party in the written version at para-6 stated “The car was booked by the customer in the month of October in which free accessories to be given was of the value of Rs.10,000/-. However, as the customer made the final payment of the vehicle in November,2016 and thereby made the purchase, by which time the scheme of free accessories had been reduced to Rs.7,000/-. Every customer is made to understand that the scheme prevailing at the time of actual purchase will be given”.
10. Evidently, Complainant has not been given the benefit of that Rs.7000/- even against accessories purchased. No reason is available on the record why such benefit has not been given. From the documents and evidence of the Accountant, Sri Rana Phukan examined by the Forum, we have found that Complainant was given the benefit of Rs.25,000/- (Rs 22,000/- as discount Plus Rs.3,000/- under Institutional Sale Scheme).It has already been mentioned in para 8 above that aforesaid Rs.25,000/- was not realized from the Complainant.
Taking into view the entire materials on record, more particularly for not giving the benefit of Rs.7000/- against accessories to the Complainant as per scheme, we have no hesitation to decide both the Points in favour of the Complainant.
11.Point No.(iii)- In view of decision on the foregoing Points in favour of the Complainant, we are of the opinion that the Complainant is entitled to receive Rs.7000/- as price realized for accessories and litigation cost and compensation for causing harassment, mental pain etc . Complainant has prayed Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental pain and agony and humiliation meted out to him by willingly charging in excess, and Rs.10,000/- as cost and expenses.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in its entirety,we deem it just and proper to fix the amount of compensation amd cost of litigation at Rs.20,000/-.
O R D E R
In the result, the complaint stands allowed on contest with compensation and cost. Accordingly, opposite party is directed to refund Rs.7000/- as the price realized for accessories along with a lump sum amount of Rs.20,000/- as compensation and cost. Opposite party is directed to comply with the award within 30(thirty) days of receipt of copy of the judgment and order. Default in
compliance shall entail interest @ 9% per annum on Rs.7000/- w.e.f the date of complaint till realization of the award in full.
Given under our hands and seal of this Forum this 29th day of November, 2017.
Dictated and corrected by: Pronounced and delivered
( A.Devee)
President (A. DEVEE)
District Consumer D.R Forum,Sonitpur President
Tezpur District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Sonitpur,Tezpur
We agree:- (P.DAS) (SMT.S.BORA)
Member Member
