HON’BLE MR. AYAN SINHA MEMBER This is a complainant u/s 35 of the C.P. Act, 2019 made by Kaji Jahangir Ahmed alleging the act of negligency against the opposite parties i.e. the Director, Vinline Engineering Private Limited (opposite party No. 1) and the Director, Hero Motocorp Limited (opposite party No. 2) and accordingly, prays for a direction upon the opposite parties to refund Rs.60,000/-, along with compensation of Rs.60,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.30,000/-. FACTS IN BRIEF The complainant booked one motor cycle/vehicle namely, “Hero Pleasure (Red)” from opposite party No. 1 who is the authorized dealer of opposite party No. 2 against payment of Rs.20,000/- on 09/07/2021 and Rs.40,000/- on 21/07/2021 by cash and accordingly, two receipts being No. VE/MR/1529 & VE/MR/1531 were issued respectively by opposite party No. 1. Thereafter, as alleged in the complaint petition, complainant stated that opposite party No. 1 had shut down its showroom and workshop from its former address and shifted to new address. Complainant made several calls which were unanswered. Complainant made a written complaint to opposite party No. 2 against opposite party No. 1 for this act and refund of money against which opposite party No. 2 assured the complainant that they would look into the matter. Due to this inaction, complainant sent legal notices to opposite party No. 1 & 2 through his learned Counsel but the alleged problem was not solved by both the opposite parties. Thus, due to harassment and mental agony, complainant filed this case before this Commission praying for certain reliefs as mentioned above. Notices were served upon both opposite party No. 1 & 2 but they did not contest this case by filing written version. Complainant adduced evidence in support of his contentions where he has reiterated the facts as mentioned in the complaint petition. Brief notes of argument under caption “Synopsis” were also filed on behalf of the complainant. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION - Whether the complainant is a consumer under the purview of C.P. Act, 2019.
- Whether there was any act of negligency on the part of the opposite parties as alleged.
- Whether the complainant is entitled to relief(s) as prayed for.
DECISION WITH REASONS All points are taken up together for sake of brevity and to avoid repetition of facts. We have carefully perused the complaint petition, the evidences adduced and the annexures filed therein. On careful scrutiny of the money receipt No. 1529 & 1531 dated 09/07/2021 and 21/07/2021 respectively, it is clearly understood that opposite party No. 1 had acknowledged payment of Rs.60,000/-, in total. The said money receipt also reflects that they were the authorized dealer of Hero and the amount received by the opposite party No. 1 was on account of Pleasure. But as the said motor cycle was not delivered to the complainant, it is very strange that opposite party No. 1 after receiving the money did not deliver the said motor cycle. Opposite party No. 2 even after receiving the complaints from the complainants also remained silent with the act of this opposite party No. 1. Since opposite party No. 1 is the authorized dealer of opposite party No. 2 and so, opposite party No. 2 cannot shirk their responsibility from this act as the complainant paid the money to opposite party No. 1 for buying the motor cycle manufactured by opposite party No. 2. It was the duty of the manufacturer- Hero Motocorp Ltd. to monitor the sale of motor cycle as they have certain agreement which is best known between the two opposite parties, for which we hold opposite party No. 2 is also liable for such act of opposite party No. 1 who is the authorized dealer of them. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the complainant being the consumer was deprived of availing the motor cycle which he had dreamt of and so, he is entitled to the reliefs. Moreover, the opposite parties have not contested this case and so, the allegations against them remain unrebutted and unchallenged despite notices were being served upon them. Complainant has also prayed for compensation of Rs.60,000/- and Rs.30,000/- towards cost of litigation which is exaggerated. In our opinion, if a direction be given upon the opposite parties to refund Rs.60,000/- along with interest @9% p.a. in the form of compensation and litigation cost of Rs.2000/- to the complainant, it would be just and appropriate. Since interest is allowed, we are not inclined to pass any separate order of compensation. In the end, the complainant has succeeded in proving his case. Hence, it is ORDERED That the instant case being no. CC/19/2023 and the same is allowed ex parte against opposite party No. 1 & 2. Opposite parties are directed to refund of Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand Only) along with simple interest @9% p.a. from the date of last money receipt issued i.e. 21/07/2021 and litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only) to the complainant within 45 days from the date of this order, failing which, the entire amount shall carry interest @10% p.a. from the date of default until realization in full. The liabilities of opposite parties are joint and as well as several. If the opposite parties failed to comply with this order, complainant is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. Dictated and corrected by me Member | 
