BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM<br /> VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM<br /> PRESENT:<br /> SHRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT<br /> SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER<br /> SMT.S .K. SREELA : MEMBER<br /> <br /> CC.No. 301/2005 Filed on 24..08..2005<br /> Dated: 16..06..2008<br /> Complainant:<br /> <br /> Basheer Kutty, Rose Cottage, Edamulakkal Village, Ayoor – P.O., Kollam.<br /> ((By Adv. Sri. Z.A. Sukul Khadar)<br /> <br /> Opposite party:<br /> <br /> Manager, Kulathunkal Motors, M.G.Road, Trivandrum.<br /> <br /> This complaint is disposed of after the period so specified under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Though the case was taken up for orders by the predecessors of this Forum on 01..03..2006, the order was not prepared accordingly. This Forum assumed office on 08..02..2008 and re-heard the complaint. This O.P having been heard on 14..05..2008, the Forum on 16..06..2008 delivered the following:<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A., MEMBER:<br /> <br /> The case of the complainant Sri. Basheerkutty is as follows: The complainant had purchased a Tata Indica Car on 18..03..2004 from the opposite party. At the time of purchasing the car the opposite party had requested the complainant to fix accessories in the car from the opposite party's shop and the opposite party promised that the accessories would be fitted at a fair and reasonable price. The opposite party fitted the accessories in the car and issued a bill for Rs.13,188/- and the complainant paid the amount. Later, the complainant came to know that the cost of the entire accessories fitted in the car would not exceed Rs. 9,115/- and he realized that the opposite party had charged an exorbitant price for the same. On 09..06..2004 the complainant sent a lawyer's notice to the opposite party, the opposite party received the notice, but no reply was sent by the opposite party and hence this complaint.<br /> <br /> 2. The opposite party set exparte. From the complainant's side produced 6 documents and filed affidavit and he has been examined as PW1.<br /> <br /> 3.Points to be ascertained:<br /> <br /> (i)Whether there is unfair trade practice or deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?<br /> (ii)Reliefs and Costs?<br /> <br /> 4. Points (i) & (ii): The case of the complainant is that the opposite party had charged an exorbitant amount from the complainant to fix accessories in his car. And also complainant alleges that the opposite party had promised to do the work in a fair and reasonable price. In this case the complainant has produced 6 documents which were marked as Ext. P1 to P6. Ext.P1 is the bill issued by the opposite party for Rs. 13,188/-. Ext. P2 is the Advocate's notice. Ext.P3 is the acknowledgement card signed by the opposite party, Ext.P4 is the postal receipt. Ext.P5 is the quotation dated 29..05..2004 of Rs.8,425/-. Ext.P6 is the estimate of Shalimar Traders issued to the opposite party. These documents are not sufficient to prove his case that the opposite party had charged an exorbitant amount from the complainant for their work. Ext.P5 is the quotation dated 29..05..2004. On a perusal of Ext.P5 it can be seen as a piece of paper which contains only a seal of Car N Style, Beach Road, Kollam. The complainant has not proved that the works considering the items mentioned in Ext.P5 were done in his case also.<br /> <br /> 5. Under these circumstance, we have to hold that the complainant is not supported by records and evidence for holding that the opposite party has charged exorbitant amount for the alleged accessories and service. Enen if the opposite party is absent the complainant will have to establish his case set out in the complaint by reliable and convincing evidence. Hence we have no other alternative than to dismiss the complaint.<br /> <br /> In the result the complaint is dismissed. No cost.<br /> <br /> A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.<br /> Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 16th day of June, 2008.<br /> <br /> G. SIVAPRASAD,<br /> PRESIDENT. <br /> <br /> <br /> BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> S.K. SREELA : MEMBER<br /> <br /> ad.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> O.P.No. 301/2005<br /> APPENDIX<br /> I. Complainant's witness:<br /> PW1 : C.S. Basheerkutty<br /> II. Complainant's documents:<br /> P1 : Original receipt No.9460 dated 19..03..2004 issued by the opposite party<br /> P2 : Copy of advocate notice dated 09..06..2004<br /> P3 : Original acknowledgment card <br /> P4 : Original postal receipt No.1891 for Rs.25/-<br /> P5 : Original quotation dated 29..05..2004 of Rs. 8425/-<br /> <br /> P5(a) : Visiting card<br /> <br /> P6 : Original estimate dated 04..06..2004 of Shalimar Traders issued to opposite party.<br /> <br /> <br /> III. Opposite party's witness: NIL<br /> <br /> IV.Opposite party's documents: N IL<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> <br />