THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE. (ADDL. BENCH)
DATED THIS THE 25th DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
APPEAL NO.250/2022
PRESENT
SRI RAVI SHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
SMT. SUNITA C.BAGEWADI, MEMBER
Shah Mobikes Pvt. Ltd,
Authorised Dealer-Hero
Moto crop Ltd,
Having its office at
“Rasik Towers” ...Appellant/s
No.12/A/1, Lokaranjan
Mahal Road, Near Regency Theatre,
Mysore-10
Represented by its Director,
Sri.Hitesh R Shah
S/o Rasiklal M. Shah,
Aged about 55 years,
(By Sri.V.B.Shivakumar, Advocate)
-Versus-
Sri.B.K.Yoga S/o Late Karigowda,
Aged about 62 years,
Residing at ...Respondent/s
Bookankere village,
K.R.Pet taluk,
Mandya District
(In-person)
O R D E R
BY SRI RAVI SHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
The Opposite Party in complaint No.49/2020 preferred this appeal against the order passed by the District Consumer Commission, Mandya which directed this appellant to pay an amount of Rs.58,475/- with 8% interest per annum along with Rs.5,000/- towards deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.3,000/- towards litigation expenses and submits that the complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission alleging unfair trade practice in not properly repairing the vehicle of the complainant.
2. The District Commission after trial allowed the complaint and directed this appellant to pay an amount spent towards repair of the vehicle along with compensation as stated above. In fact the vehicle was repaired to the satisfaction of the complainant and the complainant has not given any dissatisfaction or adverse report with respect to the repair of the vehicle. In spite of that had filed a complaint alleging unfair trade practice and sought for amounts spent towards repair. The District Commission without considering the prompt repair made by this appellant had directed this appellant to pay the repair charges to the complainant. They have rendered their service according to their norms and the entire vehicle was repaired by adding new spare parts to the vehicle. In spite of that the District Commission not considered the said defence and directed this appellant to pay the above said above. The order passed by the District Commission is not in accordance with law; they are not liable to pay any amounts to the complainant. Hence, prayed for set aside the orders passed by the District Commission and dismiss the complaint, in the interest of justice and equity.
3. Heard from both sides.
4. On perusal of the certified copy of the order, memorandum of appeal, we notice that the court commissioner was appointed for the purpose of inspection of the vehicle towards repair rendered by the Opposite Party/ this appellant. As per the Court Commissioner report, the District Commission noticed the small spare parts are not new one and they are second hand spare parts, the vehicle was repaired after inserting all second hand spare parts and delivered to the complainant. The complainant is not satisfied with the repair and alleged unfair trade practice and claimed for repair charges.
5. When we are of the opinion that, when the Court Commissioner reports that, there is a second hand spare parts noticed in the vehicle, the Opposite Party ought not to collect the charges of the new spare parts. If at all he repaired the vehicle by inserting some second hand spare parts, the same would have informed to the complainant and the complainant might not have agreed for repair of the vehicle. This Opposite Party clearly rendered unfair trade practice by inserting an used spare parts at the time of repair. The District Commission has rightly allowed the complaint and directed this appellant to pay the above said amount. We do not find any merits in the arguments of the learned advocate for appellant. As such the appeal is dismissed as we do not find any irregularity in the order passed by the District Commission. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:-
O R D E R
The appeal is dismissed. No order as to cost.
The impugned order dated 28.09.2021 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mandya in CC.No.49/2020 is confirmed.
The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the concerned District Commission to disburse the same to the complainant.
Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as Concerned District Commission.
Member Judicial Member
Jrk/-
