BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
PRESENT SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER
C.C. No. 288/2008 Filed on 27.11.2008 Dated : 15.02.2010 Complainant:
Udayakumar. K, Jyothi Bhavan, Ex-Service Men's Colony P.O, Pacha, Palode, Elavupalam – 695 562.
Opposite parties:
Shaji Vamadevan, General Manager, Deedi Motors Pvt. Ltd., Convent Road, General Hospital Junction, Thiruvananthapuram having the new address N.H Bye pass, Venpalavattom, Anayara P.O, Thiruvananthapuram-29. Pramod, Sales Manager, Deedi Motors Pvt. Ltd., Convent Road, General Hospital Junction, Thiruvananthapuram having the new address N.H Bye pass, Venpalavattom, Anayara P.O, Thiruvananthapuram-29.
(By adv. James Ninan)
This O.P having been taken as heard on 30.12.2009, the Forum on 15.02.2010 delivered the following: ORDER SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD: PRESIDENT The facts leading to the filing of the complaint are that complainant approached opposite parties on 16.09.2008 for purchasing Chevrolet Spark PS White colour Car and booked for the same by remitting Rs. 1,000/- to opposite parties, that opposite party issued price list for the period from 06.09.2008 to 05.10.2008 and according to the price list issued to the complainant the price of the said car was Rs. 3,25,965/- which included three year service package, insurance, road tax and registration charges, that complainant remitted the said amount by way of D.D dated 30.09.2005, that opposite party did not supply the said car on that day itself, rather a platinum metallic colour car was supplied to complainant on 10.10.2008 without inclusion of 3 year service packages. It is submitted by the complainant that without service package the price of the car would come to Rs. 3,15,106/-, while opposite party collected Rs. 3,43,889/-. Hence this complaint to direct opposite parties to return the excess amount collected by opposite parties from the complainant. Opposite parties filed version contending that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts, that complainant booked for the purchase of Chevrolet Spark PS White colour Car on 16.09.2008 and a proforma invoice was issued to him on his request for the aforesaid vehicle, that at the time of booking it was clearly informed to the complainant that the price at the time of taking delivery of the vehicle is applicable and the same fact was very clearly noted in the proforma invoice, price list and the booking order issued to the complainant. Complainant remitted Rs. 3,25,965/- as per the proforma invoice on 30.09.2008. It is submitted by opposite parties that complainant expressed his desire to purchase Platinum Metallic colour car instead of the ordinary colour already booked, that complainant agreed to pay extra price of platinum metallic colour. Accordingly complainant purchased the said car on 10.10.2008. The allegation in the complaint that there is shortage of white colour car and opposite parties told the complainant that there is no change in the price of the vehicle is utter falsehood and hence denied. Complainant had not opted 3 years service package for the vehicle he purchased. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. Hence none of the reliefs sought for by the complainant are allowable. Hence opposite parties prayed for dismissal of the complaint. The points that arise for consideration are:- Whether opposite parties have collected excess amount from the complainant? Whether there is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties? Whether the complainant is entitled to get compensation for delivery of Spark car?
In support of the complaint, complainant has filed an affidavit of himself as PW1 and Exts. P1 to P14 were marked. Complainant has been cross examined by the opposite party. In rebuttal 2nd opposite party has filed an affidavit of himself as DW1 and Exts. D1 to D7 were marked and DW1 has been cross examined by the complainant. Points (i) to (iii):- It is the case of the complainant that on 16.09.2008 complainant approached opposite parties for purchasing Chevrolet Spark PS White colour Car and booked for the same by remitting Rs. 1,000/- to opposite parties, that opposite party issued price list for the period from 06.09.2008 to 05.10.2008 and according to the price list issued to the complainant the price of the said car was Rs. 3,25,965/- which included three year service package, insurance, road tax and registration charges. It is the specific case of the complainant that though complainant remitted Rs. 3,25,965/- by way of D.D dated 30.09.2005, opposite party did not supply the said car on that day itself, rather a platinum metallic colour car was supplied to complainant on 10.10.2008 without inclusion of 3 year service packages, that without service package the price of the car would come to Rs. 3,15,106/- while opposite parties collected Rs. 3,43,889/- from the complainant. In the version it is averred that on the booking day opposite party issued a proforma invoice to the complainant on his request, that at the time of issue of proforma invoice, price list it was clearly informed to the complainant that the price at the time of taking delivery of the vehicle is applicable and the same fact was clearly informed to the complainant that the price at the time of taking delivery of the vehicle is applicable and the same fact was clearly noted in the proforma invoice. It is argued by the opposite party that, admittedly complainant remitted Rs. 3,25,965/- on 30.09.2008 as per the proforma invoice issued to him on 16.09.2008 and that it is only due to desire expressed by the complainant a platinum metallic colour was supplied to him provided complainant agreed to pay the extra price as stated in the aforesaid price lists. Ext. P1 is the copy of the order booking form dated 16.09.2008. As per Ext. P1, complainant has booked for purchase of Spark PS white colour car by remitting Rs. 1,000/-. The price details included vehicle cost Rs. 2,96,254/- insurance Rs. 8,581/-, road tax Rs. 17,880/- and registration charges Rs. 3,250/-. Complainant is seen signed in Ext. P1 form subject to the terms and conditions of the booking set out overleaf of the Ext. P1. Ext. P2 is the copy of the customer receipt voucher dated 16.09.2008 for Rs. 1,000/- towards advances against Spark PS white. Ext. P3 is the copy of the proforma invoice dated 16.09.2008 wherein the price of the Chevrolet Spark including road tax and registration charges mentioned is Rs. 3,25,965/-. Ext. P4 is the copy of the ledger account. Ext. P5 is the copy of Form No. 8B dated 10.10.2008. As per Ext. P5 the price of Chevrolet Spark Platinum metallic colour is Rs. 2,94,623/-. Ext. P6 is the copy of the D.D dated 29.09.2008 for Rs. 3,25,965/- in the name of M/s Deedi Motors (P) Ltd. Ext. P7 is the copy of the customer receipt voucher dated 30.09.2008 for Rs. 3,25,965/-. Ext. P8 is the copy of the price list with effect from 06.09.2008 to 05.10.2008. As per Ext. P8 the cost of vehicle in different colour is noted. Ext. P12 and P13 are copies of the bills showing the cost of accessories as Rs. 11,871/- + Rs. 7,827/-. Ext. P14 is the copy of the customer receipt voucher dated 11.10.2008 for Rs. 16,924/-. To support the version, opposite parties have furnished Exts. D1 to D7. Ext. D1 is the copy of the proforma invoice dated 16.09.2008. Exts. D2 and D3 is the copy of the price with effect from 06.10.2008 to 05.11.2008. As per Ext. D3, the on road price of the said vehicle is Rs. 3,18,531/-. Ext. D4 and Ext. P1 are one and the same, the order booking form. Ext. D5 and P5 are one and the same. Ext. D6 and P4 are one and same. Ext. D7 is the copy of the owner's statement of acceptance. As per Ext. D7, the date of delivery of the vehicle is 10.10.2008. It is seen stated in Ext. D7 that the car has been delivered in an orderly and proper operating condition including keys, service booklet and tool kit. The major issue herein to be considered is whether the opposite parties have collected excess amount from the complainant. As per clause 12 of the terms and conditions printed overleaf of the Ext. P1 order booking form, the vehicle specification, price and statutory levies shall be applicable as on the date of invoicing by Deedi Motors (P) Ltd. Ext. P8 shows the price list of the said vehicle with effect from 06.09.2008 to 05.10.2008. As per Ext. P6 complainant had taken D.D on 29.09.2008 for Rs. 3,25,965/- in the name M/s Deedi Motors (P) Ltd. On a perusal of Ext. P1 it is seen that complainant had booked for Spark PS white colour for Rs. 3,25,965/- which included vehicle cost of Rs. 2,96,254/-, insurance Rs. 8,581/-, road tax Rs. 17,880/- and registration charges Rs. 3,250/- and service package. The same amount is seen remitted by Ext. P6 D.D dated 29.09.2008 and Ext. P7 customer receipt voucher dated 30.09.2008. It is the specific case of the complainant that the delivery of the booked car had been delayed till 10.10.2008. Moreover complainant was not given his preferred white colour car rather he was motivated to take a platinum metallic colour car after 10 days from the date of remittance of the aforesaid amount. Non-delivery of white coloured vehicle to complainant within reasonable time would amount to deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. As per Ext. P8, the price list, price of the vehicle in 7 different colours is noted as same in column “C”. According to opposite parties, complainant expressed his desire to purchase a platinum metallic colour instead of the ordinary colour already booked and complainant agreed to pay extra price of the platinum. There is no material to show that complainant has demanded a platinum metallic coloured vehicle. It is the say of the complainant that he was forced to take a metallic colour car due to non-delivery/shortage of the colour already booked by him. As per clause 6 of the Terms and conditions mentioned in Ext. P8, prices mentioned are for Casablanca white Fiery red and intense black only and all other colours available at Rs. 5,215/- extra which is seen totally against those mentioned in column 'C' of Ext. P8, wherein it is seen stated that Spark PS car in seven different colours has the same price. Further it is to be noted that the extra price of metallic colour is seen printed in small fonts without catching the attention of consumer. It is further argued by the complainant that though the D.D given includes service package, road tax, insurance, registration etc. the opposite parties purposefully exempted the same package. Opposite parties never denied the same in their version. It is pertinent to point out that as per Ext. P8 price list the special ex showroom price is Rs. 2,86,254/-, while the ex-showroom price with CPCOO (Chevrolet promise Cashless ownership offer) is Rs. 2,96,254/-. Non-delivery of the preferred (booked) coloured car within reasonable time, exclusion of service package (CPCOO) violating the order booking form (Ext. P1) and claiming extra price for metallic colour by printing the same in small fonts without catching the attention of consumers etc. would show the unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Taking into consideration of totality of circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that it will be expedient and justice will be well met if complainant is allowed a compensation of Rs. 10,000/-. In the result, complaint is allowed. Opposite parties shall pay the complainant a sum of Rs. 10,000/-. The said amount will carry interest at the rate of 12% if not paid within two months from the date of receipt of this order. Both parties shall bear and suffer their costs. A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room. Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 15th day of February 2010.
G. SIVAPRASAD, President. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER
S.K. SREELA : MEMBER
jb C.C. No. 288/2008 APPENDIX I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS : PW1 - K. Udayakumar II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS : P1 - Photocopy of order booking form dated 16.09.2008 P2 - Photocopy of customer receipt voucher dated 16.09.2008 P3 - Photocopy of proforma invoice dated 16.09.2008 P4 - Photocopy of purchase bill ledger account. P5 - Photocopy of purchase bill dated 10.10.2008 P6 - Photocopy of the D.D dated 29.09.2008 for Rs. 3,25,965/-. P7 - Photocopy of customer receipt voucher dated 30.09.2008 P8 - Photocopy of the price list. P9 - Photocopy of advertisement. P10 - Photocopy of advertisement. P11 - Photocopy of advertisement. P12 - Photocopy of tax invoice dated 11.10.2008 P13 - Photocopy of tax invoice dated 11.10.2008 P14 - Photocopy of customer receipt voucher dated 11.10.2008. III OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESS : DW1 - Pramod. S. IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS : D1 - Photocopy of proforma invoice dated 16.09.2008 D2 - Photocopy of price list D3 - Photocopy of price list D4 - Photocopy of order booking form dated 16.09.2008 D5 - Photocopy of cash/credit invoice No. 1200827 dated 10.10.08. D6 - Photocopy of ledger account. D7 - Photocopy of the owner's statement of acceptance.
PRESIDENT |
