Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/5/2017

D.Ashok Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, TVS Credit Services Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

D.Asentha Mani

16 Sep 2022

ORDER

Date of Complaint Filed : 23.12.2016

Date of Reservation      : 01.09.2022

Date of Order               :16.09.2022

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                           : PRESIDENT

                       THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,           :  MEMBER  I 

                       THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,    : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 5/2017

FRIDAY, THE 16^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022

 

D.Ashok Kumar (Age 28 Years),

S/O M.Devaraj,

No. 134, Ii Floor,

Thambu Chetty Street,

Chennai - 600 001.                                                            ... Complainant    

 

..Vs..

1.The Manager,

TVS Credit Services Limited',

 No. 29, Haddows Road,

Jayalakshmi Estates,

Chennai - 600 006.

 

2.The Manager,

'Sri Dharam TVS Motors',

 No. 110, Gingee Road,

Tindivanam,

Villupuram District.                                                      ...  Opposite Parties

******

Counsel for the Complainant           : M/s. D.A. Senthamani

Counsel for the 1^st Opposite Party   : Exparte

Counsel for the 2^nd Opposite Party  : M/s. G. Mohammed Aseef

 

On perusal of records and after having heard the oral arguments of the Counsel for the Complainant, we delivered the following:

 

ORDER

Pronounced by the President Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to direct the 1^st Opposite Party to provide the copy of the RC Book and Insurance Copy and direct the Opposite Parties to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- for long delay in handing over the vehicle, delay in registering the vehicle and direct Opposite Parties to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and hardship caused to the Complainant along with cost of Rs.25,000/-.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

The Complainant after seeing a pamphlet/ advertisement issued by the 2^nd Opposite Party had booked a TVS Apache two wheeler (Black Colour, Old Model, 160 CC), for the total amount of Rs.85,159/- on 26.02.2016. The 2^nd Opposite Party had explained the procedure to avail two wheeler loan from the 1^st Opposite Party and instructed the Complainant to make initial payment of Rs.26,425/- and a monthly installment of Rs.2845/- for 29 months. On 26.02.2016 the Complainant paid a sum of Rs.24,000/- and the balance of Rs.2425/- to be paid at the time of delivery. The 2^nd Opposite Party promised the Complainant that the vehicle will be delivered within a week. In spite of several communications to the 2^nd Opposite Party, the 2^nd Opposite Party did not give a proper response to the Complainant. On 09.04.2016, 16.04.2016 the Complainant went to the office of the 2^nd Opposite Party demanding delivery of his two wheeler. The 2^nd Opposite Party promised to deliver within a week, but failed to keep their promise. At last on 22.04.2016 he received a call from the 2^nd Opposite Party stating that the vehicle was ready for delivery on the next day i.e on 23.04.2016. The Complainant paid the balance amount of Rs.2425+150+500, issued four blank cheques for security and after a very long time the Complainant had received his Two Wheeler Apache. On 24.05.2016 the Complainant had sent a legal notice to the 2^nd Opposite Party seeking compensation for the deficiency in service. Even after delivering the vehicle the 2^nd Opposite Party did not take steps to register the vehicle in time. Only on 21.06.2016 the Complainant got registration Number of the vehicle.  When the Complainant booked the vehicle he was informed to pay monthly installments of Rs.2425/- for 29 months to the 1^st Opposite Party. However the 1^st Opposite Party without any prior notice had changed the loan scheme and according to the new loan scheme the Complainant had to pay the monthly installment of Rs.3510/- for 24 months and the Complainant with no other option was compelled to accept the same. Though the vehicle was registered on 09.06.2016 but the 1^st Opposite Party did not provide the copy of the RC book and Insurance copy of the vehicle to the Complainant. The Complainant had sent a notice dated 24.08.2016 to the 1^st Opposite Party demanding copy of RC Book and Insurance copy of the vehicle. But the 1^st Opposite Party failed to send any reply, which clearly amounts to deficiency of service. Hence the complaint.

3. Written Version filed by the 2^ndOpposite Party in brief is as follows:-

The 2^nd Opposite Party submits that the Pamphlet/Advertisement were distributed for New Year sale in (2016) i.e last two days of December 2015 for specific two wheeler TVS Jupiter, TVS star City, TVS Sport not for TV Apache which was not available in show room. The Complainant approached their show room on 26.06.2016 for (EMI loan facility) booking TVS Two wheeler Apache (Black Colour, 160 CC, Old Model). The concerned model was not available in show room and it was informed to the Complainant   that it will take two months’ time for delivery. Accepting the same the Complainant booked the two wheeler and paid Rs.24,000/- as advance. The 1^st Opposite Party initiated verification of Address Proof, ID proof and Bank details and sanctioned the two wheeler loan. Only under the compulsion of the Complainant, the two wheeler was delivered on 23.04.2016 without complying the registration formalities. The Complainant after taking delivery of the two wheeler came only on 04.06.2016 for registration. On that day on account of inspection and other duty of RTO they were unable to register the two wheeler. Finally on 09.06.2016 the vehicle was registered in Dindivanam Registration Office bearing Registration No. TN-16-C-5805. The RC Book as usual was handed over to the 1^st Opposite Party (financial company).  Only after sanctioning the loan by the 1^st Opposite Party this Opposite Party could be delivered the vehicle. It is on the part of the 1^st Opposite Party to give copy of RC Book, Insurance to the Complainant. There is no deficiency in service and delay in service on the part of the 2^nd Opposite Party. Hence the complaint is to be dismissed.

4.      The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-17 were marked. The 1^st Opposite Party remained exparte in spite of sufficient notice on them. The 2^nd Opposite Party filed Proof Affidavit and no document was marked on the side of the 2^nd Opposite Party.

5.     Points for Consideration

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled to?

Point No.1

        The admitted facts are that the Complainant had booked a Two wheeler TVS Apache(Black Colour, Old Model, 160 CC) on 26.02.2016 with the 2^nd Opposite Party by paying the advance amount of Rs.24,000/- and took delivery of the vehicle on 23.04.2016 by paying the  sum of Rs.2425/- + Rs.150/- + Rs.500/- and the balance amount to be pay in monthly instalments of Rs.3510/- for 24 months.

        The dispute arose when there is a delay of about 2 months from the date of booking as against the assurance made by the 2^nd Opposite Party to deliver the vehicle.

The contention of the Complainant is that the 2^nd Opposite Party had accepted to arrange two wheeler loan from the 1^st Opposite Party for the purchase of two wheeler from the 2^nd Opposite Party. The 2^nd Opposite Party had instructed that the initial payment is Rs.26,425/- and the monthly instalment amount of Rs.2845/- for 29 months. But the 1^st Opposite Party informed the Complainant in May 2016 that as per the loan scheme the Complaint had to pay the monthly instalment of Rs.3510/- for 24 months which the Complainant was compelled to accept. The Complainant made several phone calls as well as approached the 2^nd Opposite Party in person, but there was no response to his phone calls and when he went to the 2^nd Opposite Party office he was told that the vehicle will be delivered soon. But the Opposite Party was very lethargic and failed to fulfil their words. Finally after a very long time the Complainant received his two wheeler on 23.04.2016. After delivering the vehicle the 2^nd Opposite Party did not take steps to register the vehicle. After several request and reminders of the Complainant, on 09.06.2016 the vehicle was registered before the RTO office, Dindivanam. The 1^st Opposite Party did not provide the copy of the RC Book, Insurance to the Complainant.

The 2^nd Opposite Party contended that the Pamphlet/ Advertisement is for specific two wheeler and not for TVS Apache. The Opposite Party had informed the Complainant about the non availability of the concerned model two wheeler and it would take two months for delivery. The Complainant had accepted the same and paid Rs.24,000/- as advance. The delay in registration of the two wheeler was because of the Complainant. The RC book was handed over to the 1^st Opposite Party and the 1^st Opposite Party had to issue photocopy of the RC Book, Insurance to the Complainant.

Ex.A1 is the advertisement for the purchase of two wheelers of TVS company at lesser advance easy EMI immediate delivery, lower interest rate and other offer. The contention of the 2^nd Opposite Party that the offer is only for the specific two wheeler like TVS Jupiter, TVS Star City, TVS Sport and not for TVS Apache could not be accepted as the offer was general offer for the two wheelers of TVS Company.  As the advertisement showed immediate delivery of two wheeler, the Complainant could have expected delivery of the vehicle immediately.  As per Ex.A-1 and Ex.A-2 the Complainant had booked the Apache two wheeler on 26.02.2015 by paying the advance amount of Rs.24,000/- by cash. However the vehicle was delivered on 23.04.2016 as found in Ex.A5 which is after a delay of 2 months from the date of booking of the vehicle. The 2^nd Complainant by giving a false assurance and misleading the Complainant that the vehicle would be delivered immediately but having delivered the vehicle after a period of 2 months would amount to unfair trade practice.

Even after taking delivery of the vehicle there is delay on the Opposite Parties in registering the vehicle. According to the Complainant, copy of the RC Book and insurance copy was not furnished to him. The Complainant had sent notice to the Opposite Parties as per Exs.A-11 to Ex.A-17, seeking copy of RC Book and Insurance. The 2^nd Opposite Party had issued a reply dated 01.08.2016, Ex.A14 stating that the RC Book and Insurance was handed over to the 1^st Opposite Party and to collect the RC Book and Insurance Policy from the 1^st Opposite Party. However the 1^st Opposite Party neither issued any reply nor copy of RC Book and the insurance. Even before this Commission the 1^st Opposite Party remained exparte.

Considering the facts and circumstances the case, this Commission is of the considered view that the Opposite Parties in not providing the copy  RC Book and insurance policy to the Complainant and the 2^nd Opposite Party having committed long delay in handing over the vehicle to the Complainant had committed deficiency of service. Accordingly, Point No.1 is answered.

Point No.2 and 3:-

As discussed and decided in Point No.1 the Opposite Parties are liable  to provide the copy of RC Book and Insurance Copy and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- for the delay in handing over the vehicle as well as towards deficiency of service and mental agony and to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- towards costs, to the Complainant. Accordingly Point Nos.2 and 3 are answered.

In the result the complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally directed  to provide the copy of RC Book and Insurance Copy and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) for the delay in handing over the vehicle as well as towards deficiency of service and mental agony and to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- (Rupees Three Thousand Only) towards costs, to the Complainant, within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the above amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of receipt of this order till the date of payment.

In the result the Complaint is allowed.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 16^th of September 2022.

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1	-	Advertisements issued by the 2nd  Opposite Party for Selling two wheeler.
Ex.A2	26.02.2016	Quotation issued by the 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A3	26.02.2016	Payment receipt issued by 2nd Opposite Party for a sum of Rs. 24,000/-.
Ex.A4	23.04.2016	Payment receipt issued by 2nd Opposite Party for a sum of Rs. 2425/-.
Ex.A5	23.04.2016	Payment receipt issued by 2nd Opposite Party for a sum ofRs. 150/-.
Ex.A6	23.04.2016	Delivery Slip issued by the 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A7	20.05.2016	Loan Details sent to the complainant by 1st Opposite Party
Ex.A8	20.04.2016	Notice issued to the 2nd Opposite Party by the complainant.
Ex.A9	24.05.2016	Postal Receipts for the said notice.
Ex.A10	-	Acknowledgment card.
Ex.A11	23.07.2016	Notice issued to the 2nd Opposite Party by the complainant.
Ex.A12	23.07.2016	Postal receipt for the said notice.
Ex.A13	25.07.2016	Acknowledgment card.
Ex.A14	01.08.2016	Reply issued by the 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A15	24.08.2016	Notice issued to the 1st opposite Party by the Complainant
Ex.A16	24.08.2016	Postal receipt for the said notice
Ex.A17	-	Copy of the acknowledgement card

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Parties :-

 

NIL

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                   B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT