Nisha Nath Ojha
- In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
- To direct the opposite party to pay Rs. 17,990/- ( Rs. Seventeen Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety only ) along with 18% interest.
- To direct the opposite party to pay compensation as well as litigation costs.
- The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-
The complainant has asserted that she has purchased a car in her name which was to be gifted to her daughter in her marriage. The aforesaid car is known as Maruti A Star VKi BS III. The complainant was directed by opposite party to deposit Rs. 20,000/- as booking amount and hence she paid the aforesaid amount on 25.04.2009. Thereafter, the complainant has deposited altogether Rs. 4,20,000/- to opposite party through bank draft etc. as will appear from annexure – 1 and 4. It is stated that out of aforesaid amount, Rs. 1,00,000/- has been financed by Magma Finance Co. Ltd.
It is further case of the complainant that opposite party had already received Rs. 4,20,000/- from the complainant while the price of the car is Rs. 4,02,010/-, Hence it was duty of the opposite party to return the rest amount of Rs. 17,990/- to the complainant at the time of delivery of the car on 25.05.2009 but the opposite party has not returned the aforesaid amount illegally. For receiving the amount she had come from Delhi on 18.06.2009 but despite that the aforesaid amount has not been returned.
The complainant has asserted that despite assurance the aforesaid amount has not been paid to her by the opposite party.
On behalf of opposite party objection petition has been filed stating therein that at the time of delivering the aforesaid car the opposite party offered to take excess deposit but the complainant demanded interest on the aforesaid amount. In Para – 5 of the objection petition the opposite party has made following averments, “that the statement made in Para – 6 of complaint petition is bundle of lie. The petitioner/opposite party never refused to return the excess deposited amount of Rs. 17,990/- to the complainant but she was demanding unreasonable amount from the petitioner and under such circumstances the petitioner felt himself unable to fulfill her demand.”
On behalf of complainant a rejoinder has been filed stating therein that the contention of the opposite party is not correct rather she has visited several times for receiving the aforesaid amount but she was not been paid the aforesaid excess amount by opposite party. She has denied the allegation of the opposite party that she refused to take money and demanded interest etc.
-
From the bare perusal of objection petition of opposite party it is crystal clear that Rs. 17,990/- of the complainant is due with him. The complainant in his rejoinder has narrated the several incident with detail which clearly prove that the complainants was harassed by opposite party because it does not appeal to reason that complainant has refused to accept her due amount for which she is fighting this litigation since 2009. The total incident mentioned in the rejoinder of the complainant has not been denied by the opposite party rather the assertion of the opposite party has been denied by the complainant.
For the discussion made above we find and hold that in not returning Rs. 17,990/- to the complainant at the time of delivery of the car i.e. on 25.05.2009 the opposite party has committed serious deficiency.
For the discussion made above we direct the opposite party to return Rs. 17,990/- to the complainant within the period of two months from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order failing which opposite party will pay 10% on the aforesaid amount of Rs. 17,990/- till its final payment.
Opposite party is further directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- to the complainant by way of compensation and litigation costs within the period of two months.
Accordingly this complaint stands allowed to the extent referred above.
Member President
