Kerala

Wayanad

CC/142/2021

Mammi D, Kuruppan Thodika (H), Meppadi (PO), Kottapadi (part), Pin:673577 - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Managing Director, Popular Vechiles&Services Ltd., (Authorised Maruti Dealer), Building No:33/49 - Opp.Party(s)

22 Jul 2024

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
CIVIL STATION ,KALPETTA
WAYANAD-673122
PHONE 04936-202755
 
Complaint Case No. CC/142/2021
( Date of Filing : 26 Oct 2021 )
 
1. Mammi D, Kuruppan Thodika (H), Meppadi (PO), Kottapadi (part), Pin:673577
Kottapadi
Wayanad
Kerala
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Managing Director, Popular Vechiles&Services Ltd., (Authorised Maruti Dealer), Building No:33/4952, Jaya Arcade, Bypass Road, Thodayad, Chevarambalam (PO)
Thodayad
Kozhikkode
Kerala
2. The Sales Manager, Popular Vechiles&Services Ltd., (Authorised Maruti Dealer), Building No:33/4952, Jaya Arcade, Bypass Road, Thodayad, Chevarambalam (PO
Thodayad
Kozhikkode
Kerala
3. The Relationship Manager, Muhammed Jamsheer E, Popular Vechiles&Services Ltd., (Authorised Maruti Dealer), Building No:33/4952, Jaya Arcade, Bypass Road, Thodayad, Chevarambalam (PO
Thodayad
Kozhikkode
Kerala
4. Accounts Manager, Popular Vechiles&Services Ltd., (Authorised Maruti Dealer), Building No:33/4952, Jaya Arcade, Bypass Road, Thodayad, Chevarambalam (PO
Thodayad
Kozhikkode
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. Bindu R PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Beena M MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. A.S Subhagan MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 22 Jul 2024
Final Order / Judgement

By Smt. Beena. M, Member:-

            This is a complaint filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.

2.  Facts of the case in brief:  The Complainant contacted the dealer, Popular Vehicles and Services Ltd., Kozhikode branch on 04.03.2021 regarding the purchase of NEW BALENO BS- VI DELTA P for his own use.   As per which the Complainant was told that the total expenses would be Rs.7,47,614/- for this, and the correct Proforma Invoice dated 27.02.2021 regarding the offers was given by the company to the Complainant.  But as per Performa Invoice dated 22.02.2021, Rs. 6,61,589/-as show room price, Rs.26,735/-as insurance, Rs.72,775/- as road tax, Rs.1,015/- as RTO registration charge and Rs.500/-as fast tag and so the total is Rs.7,62,614/-, after reducing Rs.15,000/- as consumer offer, the remaining Rs.7,47,614/- has been collected from the Complainant. Then the Opposite Parties who received Rs.26,735/- as insurance, but they have paid only Rs.24,880/-, out of which, additional Rs.1,855/-have been received from the Complainant. Also, the Opposite Parties who said that basic accessories were free, but they have billed Rs.6,580/- for that item with side beading fog lamp etc. and they have shown the accessories as discount in the bill only Rs.4,690/-.  Here the Opposite Party obtained Rs.1,890/- in excess and Rs.1,015/- have been collected for registration charges, but only Rs.170/- has been spent by the Opposite Party, out of which Rs.845/- has been collected in excess. A total of Rs.4,590/- has been obtained in excess.  Hence, this complaint.

3.  The Commission sent notice to the Opposite Parties and they appeared and filed joint version. The Opposite Parties in their joint version admitted the purchase of vehicle by the Complainant from Opposite Party and also admitted that at the time of enquiry they had issued Proforma Invoice. It was mentioned in Proforma Invoice that it is tentative and subject to change as per the prevailing rates applicable at the time of sale invoice and delivery of the vehicles to the customers.  The bill was given when the Complainant purchased the vehicle. As stated in the complaint, the excess amount was not received by the Opposite Parties. The Opposite party given quotation and the price of the car ex-showroom was quoted as Rs.6,61,589/-.  As per the bill Rs.6,61,588/- only have been received.  The insurance amount given as quotation was Rs.26,735/-, as per bill Rs.24,880/- have been taken.  From the rest of the insurance amount shown in the quotation Rs.1,855/- has been deducted as accessories.  According to the bill the cost for accessories are Rs.6,580/-.  The Opposite Party has been given Rs.4,690/- as discount.  The Complainant is liable to pay the balance of Rs.1,890/-. According to the Opposite Party, there is no unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Party. Therefore, the Opposite Party pays to dismiss the complaint.

4.  The Complainant filed proof affidavit and examined as PW1 and the documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A4.  Third Opposite Party was examined as OPW1 on behalf all the Opposite Parties. Five Documents were altogether produced by the Opposite Parties.  Exts.B1 to B3 were marked through the Complainant at the time of cross examination and Exts.B4 & 5 marked through OPW1.

5.  Points for consideration:

  1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?
  2. If so, relief and cost.

6.  We have gone through the contents of affidavit and perused the documents produced from both sides. 

  7.  The admitted facts of the complaint are that the Complainant intends to purchase the New Baleno BS VI Delta P and approached the Opposite Party and the Opposite Parties issued the quotation/proforma Invoice for Rs.7,47,614/- which includes insurance, road tax, RTO registration charges, fast tag vide Ext.A1.

8. There is no dispute with regard to Purchase of Baleno Car from Opposite Party.  From the documents filed by the Complainant, we find that the Opposite Party issued Proforma Invoice quoting the price of vehicle as Rs.6,61,589/-.  It is also found that in the Proforma Invoice it is specifically mentioned that price/consumer offer and exchange offer are currently prevailing subjected to changes as announced by Maruti. Ext.B2 is the Customer Satisfaction Note, the Complainant put his signature in the customer column, so the allegation of the Complainant that the excess amount received by the Opposite Party cannot be believable for the reason that the Complainant fully knowing the charges of the vehicle had signed on the customer satisfaction note.  Since no where did the complainant showed his protest while taking delivery of the car regarding the prevailing value as on the date of the delivery. Moreover, the Complainant is failed to produce any document to prove that the Opposite Parties collected excess amount from the Complainant.  Without any credible evidence on record we cannot believe that the Opposite Party collected excess amount from the Complainant.  Hence the Complainant fails to establish that the opposite Party collected excess amount from the complaint.  Based on the materials available on record we are of the opinion that the Complainant is not entitled for an amount as prayed in the complaint. 

In the result, the Complaint is dismissed.

 

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 22nd day of July 2024.

Date of Filing:-04.10.2021.

PRESIDENT   : Sd/-

MEMBER       : Sd/-

MEMBER       : Sd/-

 

APPENDIX.

 

Witness for the Complainant:-

 

 

PW1.              Sanoob.                                                        Business.

 

Witness for the Opposite Parties:-

 

OPW1.          Mohammed Jamsheer. E.                        Relationship Manager,

                                                                                                Popular Nexa.

 

Exhibits for the Complainant:

 

A1.                  Copy of Proforma Invoice.                                  Dt:22.02.2021.

 

A2.                  Copy of Customer Settlement Sheet.

 

A3.                  Copy of Form 20.                                      

 

A4.                  Copy of Tax/Vehicle Invoice.                              Dt:27.02.2021.      

 

 

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:-

 

B1.                  Customer Settlement Sheet.

 

B2.                  Customer Satisfaction Note.                               Dt:04.03.2021.

           

B3.                  Instant Feedback Form.                                       Dt:04.03.2021.

 

B4.                  Copy of Online Payment Receipt.                      Dt:03.03.2021.

 

B5.                  Copy of Tax Invoice/Certificate cum policy Schedule.

 

           

 

PRESIDENT   :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

/True Copy/

 

Sd/-

                                                                                             ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

                                                                                                  CDRC, WAYANAD.

Kv/-

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Bindu R]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Beena M]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. A.S Subhagan]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.