IN THE KODAGU DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MADIKERI

           ORDER DELIVERED BY HON’BLE PRESIDENT SRI PRAKASH.K

1. Complainant filed this complaint seeking direction to opposite parties to refund the amount payable by the opposite parties  to the complainant  to the tune of Rs.24,779/- with interest from the date of payment till realization at 4% per annum.  The complainant also prays cost of Rs.2,000/- and damage and compensation of Rs.20,000/-.

2. The facts of the case in brief are thus that the complainant has booked a vehicle Maruthi Alto 800 LXI from the opposite party vide invoice No.004/VSL/18000342 dated 29/12/2018 the total cost of the vehicle is Rs.2,89,031/-, insurance is Rs.13,908/- and accessories Rs.3,800/-, fast tag Rs.500/- and T.R. Rs.300/- in all Rs.3,07,539/-.  It is further case of the complainant that the old vehicle is exchanged for Rs.55,000/- total Rs.3,32,218/-paid to the opposite parties through cheque and cash for that opposite party has issued the receipt.

3. It is further case of the complainant that opposite party has to be refund to the complainant a sum of Rs.24,779/- according to the agreement entered in to  between the complainant and the opposite party.  He submits that several times he approached the opposite party and requested them to refund the above amount to him but one or the other the opposite party is dodging the payment.

4. It is further case of the complainant that he has issued a prior notice to the opposite party for refund the above amount to him on 23/09/2019.  However on receipt of notice opposite parties  not repaid the amount payable to him nor replied to the notice.  It is further case of the complainant  that opposite party has not issued the receipt for Rs.3,816/- to the complainant and that he submits that the act of the opposite party is illegal and improper and due to the act of opposite party he suffered  physically, financially and mentally.

5. After service of notice to opposite parties, opposite party nos.1 and 2 appeared through their counsel and they filed the version as under.  In the version they admits that complainant has purchased Maruti Alto 800 LXI Metallic Granite Grey with chassis No.MA3EUA61S00D65992 and Engine No.F8DN6121256 vide invoice No.004/VSL/ 18000342 dated 29/12/2018.

6. The opposite party further admits that net ex-showroom price of the vehicle is Rs.2,89,031/-.  They further admits that  the complainant has paid Rs.13,908 as premium towards insurance policy, Rs.3,800/- towards accessories, Rs.500/- towards fast tag and Rs.300/- towards temporary registration of the vehicle.  The opposite party denied complainant’s claiming to have totally paid Rs.3,32,318/- including value of the old vehicle which is exchanged as Rs.55,000/-.  The opposite party contends that  the total payment received from the complainant  is Rs.3,08,252/-.  They further contended that they seeks the complainant to provide documentary evidence the payment of Rs.3,32,380/- has claimed.   They further denied that the value of exchanged vehicle as its Rs.55,000/-.  On the other hand they contends that they brings to the notice of complainant through this court that Maruti Suzuki India Ltd manufacture of the Maruti Alto 800 LXI had offered a benefit of Rs.20,000/- as exchanged/ loyalty bonus towards exchange of used car during the time complainant brought the new car.  They further contends that they seeks the complainant to provide documentary evidence to prove that Rs.55,000/- was quoted as value for the old vehicle which was exchanged and in   complainant is entitled for Rs.20,000/- loyalty bonus towards exchange of used car thereby benefiting the complainant  for a total amount of Rs.75,000/-.  However they admits the refund of Rs.714/- and they confirms complainant is always entitled to refund of Rs.714/- and had also offered to make  the refund either through cash or cheque to the complainant.  However opposite parties contends that complainant was demanding for a higher refund amount which is legally not due to the complainant.  Further they denied the contention raised by the complainant that opposite parties intention to cheat and receiving of Rs.3,816/-.  Therefore, the opposite parties prays for disposal of the above complaint with cost.

7. In this case complainant filed his examination in chief by way of affidavit and his chief examination is considered as CW-1 and complainant also furnished seven documents which have respectively marked as exhibit P-1 to P-7, P-7(a) also marked.  Opposite parties filed their examination in chief  by way of affidavit and he also furnished four documents  the said  are now marked as exhibit R-1 to R-4.  Heard the arguments on both sides. 

8. On the basis of the above  pleadings the points for our consideration are;

1.Whether the complainant proves that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?

2.Whether complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for?

3.What order?

9. Our findings on the above points are as under;
   1. Point No.1  :- In the Affirmative
   2. Point No.2:-  Partly in the Affirmative
   3. Point No.3 :- As per the final order for the        

following ;

R E A S O N S

10. In this case opposite parties also admits that the net ex-show room price of the vehicle is Rs.2,89,031/-  after passing on discounts as applicable to the complainant.  The opposite parties further admits that the complainant has paid Rs.13,908/- as premium towards insurance policy Rs.13,908/-as premium towards insurance policy, Rs.3,800/- as accessories, Rs.500/- towards fast tag and Rs.300/- towards temporary registration of the vehicle.

11. However opposite parties denied the total payment received from the complainant amounting to Rs.3,32,318/-.  Further the opposite parties also denied that they have received Rs.3,816/- from complainant side.  Further the opposite parties also denied complainant claim of the value of the exchange vehicle as Rs.55,000/-.  Now the complainant says opposite party has to be returned a sum of Rs.24,779/- to him.  On the other hand opposite party says they have to refund only for Rs.714/- to the complainant.  Further they says they had also offered to refund the said amount to the complainant. Thus in this case entire burden casted on the complainant side to prove that he has paid total amount of Rs.3,32,318/- to the opposite party.  Further he has to prove opposite party also received Rs.3,816/- from his side.  Further burden also casted on the complainant side value of his exchange vehicle  has Rs.55,000/-.  Further the question as to whether the complainant also produced any documentary evidence to prove the same.  In this case exhibit C-1 is the charge invoice.  On perusal of exhibit C-1it appears that the cost of alleged vehicle amounting to Rs.2,89,031/-, exhibit P-2/ C-2 is the insurance policy.  Complainant paid gross insurance of Rs.13,908/-, exhibit C-3 receipt dt:07-12-2018 issued by opposite party to the complainant goes to show that complainant paid Rs.5,000/- to opposite party, exhibit C-4 goes to show that complainant paid Rs.98,252/- to opposite party.  Exhibit C-5 also goes to show that complainant paid Rs.1,70,000/-.

12. In this case complainant also produced one xerox copy of the delivery receipt  it is not the case of the opposite party that they have not issued  delivery receipt thus xerox copy of the delivery receipt produced by the  complainant now marked as exhibit C-8.  The contents of exhibit C-8 which reads as under;

“We M/s Friendly Motors (India)Pvt.Ltd., Mysore have taken the delivery of vehicle having Registration No.KA 12 N-0690 Bearing chassis No.65259 Engine No.65259 Model IKON year 2003 Colour NA from Sri Hamza K.A S/o. S/o Shri Murnad R/o. 55,000 Fifty Five thousand onlyon date 04/12/2019 at 10-15AM/ at Mysore City”.

13. Thus opposite parties have taken the delivery of vehicle  having registration No.KA 12 N 0690 bearing chassis No.65259, Engine No.65259 model Ikon year 2003 of complainant for a sum of Rs.55,000/-.  Thus opposite party now cannot denied the same.  But in this  case no any other acknowledgement  receipt produced by complainant to show that  opposite party received  sum of Rs.3,816/- from complainant side.  Thus  the documents produced  by the complainant  i.e. exhibit C-3 to C-5 and 8 clearly goes to show that opposite party received sum of Rs.3,28,252/-.  In this case opposite parties produced the statement of customer account and detailed payment mentioned in customer account and it is marked as exhibit R-4 and in the said documents annexure also shown as annexure no.1 to 3.

14. On perusal of exhibit R-4 (annexure-3) exchange value of  the old car shown as Rs.35,000/-.  Ex-show room price of the vehicle is Rs.3,38,668/-.  After deducting less discount - corporate offer minus Rs.3,000/-.  Less discount consumer offer minus Rs.25,000/-.  Less price difference between Mysore and Madikeri minus 1,538.  Less exchange/ Loyalty bonus  minus Rs.20,000/-.  Thus net show room price amounting to Rs.2,89,030/-.  Thus out of Rs.55,000/- exchange of old car of complainant ( as per exhibit C-8) Rs.20,000/- deducted less  exchange.  If the opposite parties not deducted said less exchange amount of Rs.20,000/- then complainant has to pay net ex-show room price amounting to Rs.3,09,030/-.  Thus complainant remaining old car price of  Rs.20,000/- deducted as less exchange.  Thus refundable amount to complainant is only Rs.714/-.  That amount shall be paid to complainant.  Accordingly point no.1 answered partly in affirmative. Complainant is also entitled Rs.714/- from opposite parties.  Accordingly point no.2  answered.  In the result we proceed to pass the following ;

O R D E R

1. Complaint filed by the complainant is allowed in part.
2. The opposite parties No.1 and 2 is directed to pay sum of Rs.714/- (seven hundred and fourteen only) to the complainant with cost and compensation of Rs.1,000/-
3. The opposite parties are directed to comply the aforesaid order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
4. Copy of this order as per statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of cost and file shall be consigned to record room.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed, corrected and pronounced in the open Forum on this 24^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER,2021)

    (B. NIRMALAKUMAR)      (RENUKAMBA.C)               (PRAKASH.K)                                      

           MEMBER                    MEMBER                         PRESIDENT

ANNEXURE

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainants :

CW-1  : K.A. Hamza (complainant)

Documents marked on behalf of the complainants:

Ex.C-1   : Invoice
Ex.C-2   : Insurance Copy

Ex.C-3   : Cash receipt dt:7.12.2018

Ex.C-4   : Cash receipt dt:29.12.2018

Ex. C-5  : Cash receipt dt:1.1.2019

Ex.C-6   :Notice copy

Ex.C-7   :Acknowledgement

Ex.C-7(a) : Postal receipt

Ex.C-8   : Delivery receipt

Witnesses examined on behalf of the opposite parties:

• Nil-

Documents marked on behalf of the opposite parties:

Ex.R-1 : Certified copy of the receipts

Ex.R-2 : Certified copy of the Invoice

Ex.R-3 : copy of the account statement dt:5.1.2019

Ex.R-4 : Statement of consumer account

    (B. NIRMALAKUMAR)      (RENUKAMBA.C)               (PRAKASH.K)                                      

           MEMBER                    MEMBER                         PRESIDENT