Smt. Sangita Paul, Member
This is a case filed by Achinta Roy, S/o. Madhusudan Roy of Kalinagar, Roy Para, P.S. – Nodakhali, P.O. – Bawali, Pin – 700 137, Dist. – Souht 24 Parganas against Surendra Nath Beri with a prayer for directing the OP to pay Rs.2,00,000/- only being the loss suffered by the complainant due to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- only within statutory period to be fixed by this Hon’ble Commission.
The OP is Surendra Nath Beri,. S/o. Late Tara Chand Beri. He is the proprietor of Auto Centre. The address is 487, Mahatma Gandhi Road, P.S. – Budge Budge, P.O. – Budge Budge, Pin – 700 137, Dist. – South 24 Parganas.
The complainant, by filing this case states that the complainant is a truck owner. The vehicle No. is WB59B9267. That, by plying the said truck, the complainant used to earn his livelihood with assistance of other labourers drivers and other helpers. All the labourers are attached with the truck for earning his livelihood.
The OP is the owner of the Auto Centre. The OP used to provide service as service provider. The OP also assembles part of the vehicle by way of repair of defective vehicle. During the course of plying, the vehicle became defective and in operative. The said vehicle required necessary services by replacement of its defective parts.
The complainant handed over the said vehicle on 24.08.2021 for repair and replacement of the defective parts to the OP. The OP agreed to provide necessary service to make the truck active and roadworthy.
But the OP, without rendering necessary service, remained silent. The OP failed and neglected to hand over the said vehicle in good condition. The OP raised a bill on 22.08.2021 for an amount of Rs.5,39,141/-. Till 20.12.2021, the OP has not handed over the said vehicle in running condition. The OP is negligent as well as deficient in providing service. The earning of the complainant was totally stopped.
The complainant served demand-notice dated 22.12.2021 by registered post. But the OP failed to comply with the said notice. The cause of action arose on 24.08.2021 and is continuing day by day and thereafter lastly on 01.01.2022.
Hence the complainant prays for directing the OPs to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- only being loss suffered by the complainant due to deficiency of service on the part of the OP and a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- towards mental agony totaling Rs.22,00,000/- only within statutory period to be fixed by the Hon’ble Commission. On 25.07.2021, the complainant went to the Opposite Party. He handed over the truck for necessary repair. The OP made the necessary repair by replacing several new parts and made the said vehicle in running condition. On 22.08.021, the OP raised a bill Rs.40,491/- and another bill for Rs.13,423/- totalling Rs.53,914/- as per invoice dated 22.08.2021. The complainant with deliberate intention defaulted to pay.
The OP sent a demand notice on 20.09.2021 for payment of Rs.53,914/-, but the complainant did not pay the aforesaid amount. The OP initiated a Money Suit No.202 of 2022 before the Ld. 7th Civil Judge (Sr. Division) at Alipore. The said Money Suit is still pending.
The OP denies that the complainant is suffering loss day by day. The allegations made by the complainant are denied by the OP. OP states that no deficiency in service is rendered by the OP.
Hence, the complainant prays for rejection of the instant case.
That the instant case was filed on 14.02.2022. On 21.02.2022. the case was admitted. On 27.04.2022 the OP files W/V. Copy served. On 24.06.2022, the complainant files evidence on affidavit. Copy served. On 05.09.2022, both the parties are present and OP filed questionnaire. Copy served. On 18.11.2022, the complainant filed questionnaire. Copy served. On 01.02.2023 the OP files evidence on affidavit. Copy served. On 20.03.2023 the complainant files questionnaire. Copy served. On 18.05.2023, the OP files reply. Copy served. On 19.06.2023, both parties are present and filed their respective BNAs. On 12.09.2023 both parties are present. Argument was heard at length in full. Accordingly we proceeded for giving judgement.
In the written version, the complainant states that he has no cause of action to file the instant complaint. The OP also states that this case is not maintainable in its present form, because the instant case is barred by law.
The OP denies all the allegations made in the complaint petition. The OP states that he is carrying on the work of Motor Repairing under the name ‘Auto Centre’. The OP also states that he is the owner of the truck bearing No.WN59B9267. During the course of work, the said truck became defective and inoperative and went out of order.
Points for consideration :-
- Is the complainant, a consumer?
- Is the OP guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons :-
Point No.1:-
On perusal of complaint petition written version and other documents, it appears that the complainant bought a truck bearing No.WB59B9267. The complainant bought the truck for earning his livelihood. The complainant paid a lump sum amount for purchasing the vehicle. Hence, the complainant is a consumer U/S 2(7) of C. P. Act, 2019.
Hence, the 1st point is decided in favour of the complainant.
Point No:2 :
The complainant purchased the vehicle for earning his livelihood. The number of the vehicle was WB59N9267. The complainant’s vehicle used to ply on the road. During the course of plying, the vehicle became out of order. The said vehicle required urgent repair. Therefore the complainant handed over the said vehicle for repair on 24.08.2021. The OP Auto Centre is skilled in performing the job of repair. The complainant hoped for getting essential services from the OP, Auto Centre. The OP assured to turn the vehicle in running condition. But the contrary happened. The OP did not provide the essential service. The OP promised to repair the vehicle by supplying party and required repairing. But the OP raised the bill for an amount of Rs.53,914/-. Till 20.12.2021, the OP has not handed over the said vehicle in running condition. It appears that the OP intentionally and deliberately neglected to provide proper service to the complainant. The OP neglected to render proper service within the stipulated period rather the OP is deficient in providing proper service by withholding the vehicle in question. Due to unfair trade practice the complainant suffers financial loss. His earning was totally stopped. The reason for delay is best known to the OP. The complainant had to bear the liability towards his workmen during the period when the vehicle did not ply on road. As a result, the complainant faced huge financial loss. The complainant hoped for a quick and proper repair of the vehicle. But the complainant suffered. His vehicle is still in the hands of the OP.
So the 2nd point is decided in favour of the complainant and against the OP.
Point No.03 :-
The earning of the complainant depended on the truck. The OP gave a list of expenditure, which is found to be exorbitant to the complainant. As a result, the complainant failed to take delivery of the vehicle. Being associated with the truck, the complainant found that the OP charged such a rate which should not be the proper repairing charge of the vehicle, and the OP also failed to give a proper explanation of such a huge rate. The complainant failed to take delivery of the vehicle. His earning was hampered, because it was the only livelihood of the complainant. The complainant spent time in mental agony, the vehicle is lying in the OP’s garage. Even the complainant was not informed by the OP that such a huge bill would be raised by the OP. The amount appeared to be unreasonable in comparison to the repairing work. The problem of the complainant was not solved.
Hence, the 3rd point is decided in favour of the complainant and against the OP.
In the result, the complaint case succeeds.
Hence, it is,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is allowed on contest with cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand).
That the OP is directed to deliver the vehicle to the complainant in a road-worthy condition subject to payment of Rs.53,914/- (Rupees Fifty Three thousand Nine Hundred and Fourteen) by the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order.
That the OP is directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order.
That the litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) is to be paid by the complainant within the stipulated period of 30 days.
That the complainant is at liberty to put the order into execution if the orders are not complied with within the stipulated period of 30 days.
Let a copy of the order be supplied to the parties concerned free of cost.
That the final order will be available in the following website www.confonet.nic.in.
Dictated and corrected by me.
Sangita Paul
Member
