IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA             

Monday, the 30^th day of October, 2017.

Filed on 22.02.2016.

Present

1)         Smt. Elizabeth George (President)

2)         Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)

3)         Smt. Jasmine D (Member)     

in

CC/No.56/2016

           Between

Complainant:                                                                                       Opposite parties:

Sri. Rahul Easwar                                                                1.  Sri. Price Joseph

S/o Late Easwaran Namboothiri                                               JMJ Automobiles,

Residing at TC 14/566                                                            Avaloormadam Road

Vikas Bhavan P.O.E. 5 Saphire                                                Indira Junction

Nandavanam, Trivandrum-695 003                                          Avalookkunnu.P.O

(Adv. M.G. Reshu)                                                                   Alappuzha

                                                                                                 (Adv.T.S Suresh)

 2. Sri. Paul

                                                                                                  Assistant Sub Inspector of Police

                                                                                                  Alappuzha Traffic Police Station

                                                                                                  Alappuzha

                                                                                                  (Adv.Cheriyan Kuruvila)

O  R  D  E  R

SMT.ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)

The case with the complainant is as follows:-

The complainant is the registered owner of the motor car having the maker class of Renault Duster RXE d CI (HSRA 36) bearing registration No. KL01-BP 9038.  On 28/7/2015 at about 2.45 am at night, the complainant met an accident at north of parthirapally Junction at Alappuzha district in  Cochin- Alappuzha National Highway.  The complainant was travelling in his motor car bearing registration no. KL-1 BP 9038 from North to south.  The motor car collided with a lorry on the relevant day as mentioned above and the motor car got damaged in the said accident.  Immediately, the accident was reported to the police authorities.  Accordingly, the Sub Inspector of Alappuzha Traffic Police Station registered a crime as Crime No. 1171/2015 and the police officials completed the legal formalities pertaining to the said accident on their part.  In connection with the accident and the registration of the formalities at the traffic police station and the second opposite party represented that the motor car could be repaired at the earliest within a week if ti is entrusted with the first opposite party.  Believing the words and other representations made by the second opposite party and the urgency of the vehicle on the part of the complainant,  the complainant agreed to the venture offered by the 2^nd opposite party. Accordingly, the 2^nd opposite party immediately made the presence of the 1^st opposite party at the police station over his mobile phone.  Thus, as represented by the opposite parties, the complainant entrusted the vehicle with the first opposite party on 01.08.2015 for the repair of the damage sustained to the vehicle and get it repaired free from any kind defect within a period of twenty days as promised by the 1^st opposite party.  In the mean time immediately after the accident, the surveyor from the insurance company made the assessment regarding the damage and thereby completed the formality thereon to settle the claim in future.  Quite contrary to the assurance and representations made by the 1^st opposite party the vehicle was not repaired and given back with the time as promised by him and thereby one way or other the first opposite party withheld the vehicle in his workshop.  In the meantime, whatever amount being demanded by the 1^st opposite party, the complainant was sending the same from his bank account to the bank account of the 1^st opposite party.  The complainant contacted the 1^st opposite party many time for the vehicle, but the 1^st opposite party every now and then made the complainant believe that the repair works will be over within one week.  The complainant often demanded money saying that he has placed an order for certain parts and the same will be reaching soon etc.  Thus, till  the day, the complainant has effected an amount of  Rs. 2,00,000/-(Rupees Two lakhs only) to the 1^st opposite party by way of  transferring the amount on various occasions from the bank account of the  opposite party as mentioned above.  The first opposite party has not completed the repair of the vehicle and return the same to the complainant.  Because of the non availability of the vehicle of his own from the 1^st opposite party,  the complainant was forced to avail a taxi on daily rent at Rs. 1500/- (Rupees One thousand five hundred only) .  Thus the complainant has spend an amount of Rs. 1,30,000/-(Rupees One lakh thirty thousand only) for his traveling expenses till this day.  Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party the complaint is filed.

1. Version of the 1^st opposite party is as follows:
   1. The averments in the suit para  to the effect that this opposite party promised to repair the vehicle a maximum period of 20 days is not correct, hence denied.  This opposite party has not given any assurance as alleged.  Likewise the allegation to the effect that this opposite party was present in the police station is also not correct and hence denied.  This opposite party has not given any promise regarding the period of works as alleged.  The vehicle caused extensive damages and is beyond the scope of repair. So this opposite party never gave any promise or assurance regarding the period of repairing works.   There is absolutely no negligence, carelessness, deficiency of service etc. as alleged.
   2. 3.Version of the 2^nd opposite party is as follows:-
   3. The 2nd opposite party is the Asst. Sub Inspector of police attached to the Alappuzha Traffic Police Station.  It is true that a crime was registered by the Alappuzha Traffic Police station for the road traffic accident which occurred on the morning of 27/7/2015 at the national Highway in which the vehicle owned by the complainant was involved.  As the Asst.Sub Inspector of Police of the Alappuzha Traffic Police Station, he was involved in the registration of the crime, preparation of the Mahazar, Release of the vehicle after inspection by AMVI.  He has not recommended the workshop of the 1^st opposite party for repairing and maintenance of the vehicle of the complainant which sustained damages on account of the accident. The complaint didn’t avail any services of the 2^nd opposite party for consideration.
2. Complainant was examined as PW1 documents produced marked as Ext.A1 to Ext.A3.  Surveyor was examined as PW2.  Expert commissioner was examined as PW3. The commission report marked as Ext.C1.  1^st opposite party produced photo graphs of the vehicle.
3. Points for the consideration are:-
4. Whether there is any deficiency in the service of the Opposite Parties?
5. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief?
   1. 6. It is an admitted fact complainant entrusted the vehicle with the 1^st opposite party for repairing the damages caused his vehicle in an accident on 28/7/2015.  Complainant entrusted the vehicle with the 1^st opposite party on 1/8/2015.  According to the complainant the 1^st opposite party promised that the vehicle could be repaired within 15 days or at the maximum period of 20 days to the satisfaction of the complainant.  But he did not given by the vehicle within the time promised.  The complainant paid Rs. 2,00,000/- to the opposite party.  According to the 1^st opposite party complainant paid Rs. 1,90,000/- towards repairing charges.  Along with the complainant the complainant has filed a petition to take possession of the vehicle from the possession of 1^st opposite party.  It was allowed and the 1^st opposite party wants additional Rs.25,000/- from the complainant for releasing the vehicle.   Accordingly complainant paid that amount also.  Thus it is admitted by the opposite party that complainant paid total amount of Rs. 2,15,000/- to him.  According to the complainant, opposite party returned the vehicle after taking the long time for repairing.   On verifying documents it is true that complainant entrusted the vehicle with the 1^st opposite party on 1/8/15 and opposite party returned the vehicle only by virtue of the order dated 26/4/2016.  So it is clear that the opposite party has taken about 8 months time to repair it.  According to the 2^nd opposite party the vehicle caused extensive damages and it was beyond the scope of repairing.  But the surveyor who was examined as PW2  deposed before the Forum  that he is assessed   damages for Rs. 1,74,413/-.   If it was beyond the scope of repairing as stated by the opposite party, the surveyor could not make such assessment.  It is pertinent to notice that after taking 8 months time for repairing the vehicle the opposite party returned the vehicle only by the order of this Forum.   Opposite party admitted that when the vehicle returned to the complainant as per the order of this Forum, some simple repair works were remaining.  In Ext.C1 commission report also expert noticed some repairing works were not completed.  According to the complainant the long delay in delivering the vehicle caused much inconvenience and mental agony to him.  Complainant produced Ext.A3 series the taxi bill for Rs. 18,000/-  but it was not proved.  Hence it is not accepted in evidence.  According to 1^st opposite party he has to spend additional amount for painting works and it was not paid by the complainant.  It is interesting to notice that when the opposite party failed to produce the bill for the work done in the vehicle, complainant filed petition for directing the opposite party to produce bill and as per the order of this Forum, opposite party produced the bill. But it was not proved by examing those who issued it.  Hence we are not going to accept those documents.
   2. From the above discussion we are of opinion that the long delay committed by the 1^st opposite party in delivering the vehicle to the complainant caused much inconvenience mental agony to the complainant and it has to be compensated by the opposite party.  Since some repairing the works are remaining to be completed the opposite party is bound to pay compensation for the same also. 
   3. In the result the complaint is allowed 1st opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) to the complainant for the long delay in the returning the vehicle to the complainant and also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) for the additional works left undone .  1^st opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.3000/-(Rupees Three thousand only) towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant.  Order shall be complied within one month from the date of the receipt of this order. 
6. Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by him corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the day 30^th October 2017

Sd/- Smt.Elizabeth George (President) :

Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)       :

                                                                        Sd/- Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member)          

Appendix:-

      Evidence of the complainant:-

Pw1                 -           Rahul Eswar (Wtiness)

PW2                -           Rajesh kumar(Witness)

PW3                -           Lathesh.H(Witness)

Ext.A1                        -           Copy of vehicle details

Ext.A  2          -           Bank Statement

Ext.A3series    -           Taxi Bills

Ext.C1             -           Commission report.

Evidence of the opposite parties:- 

Ext.B1             -           Photographs.

-//True Copy//-

By Order,

To                                                                                                                

Senior Superintendent.

             Complainant/Opposite parties /S/F

Typed by: br/-

Compd by :