The case of PW1, the complainant is that on 17/7/2017 he purchased a Nissan Terano car from the opposite party and they collected a total amount of Rs. 16,10,586/-. According to him the tax invoice is only Rs. 13,73,136/-. If vehicle tax is added to the same the total amount will come only Rs.15,36,411/-. Hence according to him opposite party has collected an amount of Rs.74,175/- in excess and so the complaint is filed for realizing the same along with interest he is also claiming an amount of Rs. 2lakhs as compensation. Opposite party filed version mainly contenting that the complaint itself is vague. According to them the price of the vehicle as per Nissan price list was Rs. 14,26,869/- out of the same. They offered an amount of Rs.27,900/- as insurance and Rs. 10,000/- as cash discount. After deducting the cash discount the price offered was Rs. 13,73,136/-. However road tax, insurance , TP charge, Accessories amount etc. are to be paid extra and so the total amount payable by the complainant was Rs.16,03,803/- again an amount of Rs. 3302/- was given as discount and so the complainant had to pay Rs.16,00,586/-. Hence according to them they had not collected any excess amount and so PW1 is not entitled to get any relief. Complainant got examined as PW1 and Ext.A1 to A8 were marked. During the cross examination Ext.B1 was marked. The sales consultant of opposite party was examined as RW1 and Ext.B2 to B6 were marked.
The fact that PW1 purchased a Nissan Terrano car from the opposite party is admitted. Ext.A4 is the customer order booking form dtd. 7/7/2017 and on that day Rs. 10,000/- was collected by opposite party as cash. Thereafter Ext.A6 series on 21/7/2017 Rs.57,82,75/-, on 25/7/2017 Rs. 10 lakhs and on 29/7/2017 Rs.22,311/- was paid to the opposite party by the complainant. So in total opposite party had collected an amount of Rs. 16,10,586/- from the complainant. The case of PW1 is that as per Ext.A5 tax invoice the total amount after tax is Rs.13,73,136/-. If tax is added to that amount it will come only to Rs.15,36,411/- and so opposite party had collected an amount of Rs.74,175/- in excess and for realizing the same. The complaint is filed. Per contra the contention taken in the version as well as in the proof affidavit of RW1 is that the price mentioned in Ext.A5 is the price of the vehicle. Road Tax, Insurance, TP Charges, Accessories etc.. will be extra from the tax invoice and so the total amount came to Rs. 16,10,586/-. Ext.B3 is the TR-5 form issued by the Motor Vehicle Department it shows that the total amount of Tax collected is Rs. 1,38,114/-. Ext.B6 the Form No. 27(d) which reveals that and amount of Rs.13,731/- was deducted from the complainant as collected from the complainant as Tax Deducted at Source.(TDS). Ext.B5 will shows that an amount of Rs. 28,122/- was collected as insurance. Ext.B4 is the settlement summary produced from the part of the opposite party and marked through RW1. From Ext.B4 it is revealed that the total payment will be remitted is Rs.16,03,808/- and the total payment received was Rs. 15,81,497/-. There was a balance of Rs.22,311/- and the said amount was collected from PW1 on 29/7/2017. So it can be seen that even as per Ext.B4 document produced from the side of opposite party the total amount to be remitted is Rs.16,03,808/- where as opposite party had admittedly collected an amount of Rs. 16,10,586/-. So it is seen that an amount of Rs.6778/- was collected in excess from the complainant.(16,10,586/- – 16,03,808/-).
In the argument note filed by the learned counsel appearing for the complainant it is contented that there was an offer to pay insurance. But Rs. 28,122/- was collected from PW1 which is revealed from Ext.B4. But it is noticed that Rs.24,900/- as insurance was deducted initially from the price of the vehicle. As discussed earlier the value of the vehicle as per the Nissan price list was Rs. 14,26,869/-. However as per Ext.A5 tax invoice the amount was only Rs. 13,73,136/-. So it can be seen that from the price list of Nissan is Rs. 53,733/- was given as discount and so Ext.A5 Tax Invoice is only for Rs.13,73,136/-. In the argument notice it was also contended that Rs.3222/- was given as additional discount and instead of deducting the same it was added. However on a perusal of Ext.B4 it can be seen that the said contention is unfounded. The said discount is Rs. 3222/- is added to the column payment received and so the said amount is also included as receipt. However as discussed earlier it can be seen that though an amount of Rs.16,10,586/- was collected from PW1. As per Ext.B4 settlement summary the total payment to be remitted is Rs. 16,03,808/- and so opposite party had collected an amount of Rs. 6778/- in excess. It appears that Rs.10,000/- collected as per Ext.A4 on 7/7/2017 at the time of booking the vehicle was not taken note off in Ext.B4 and so complainant is entitled to receive an amount of Rs.6778/- from the opposite party. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the opposite party complaint is vague and infact it was amended after getting the version. However it is not known how complainant arrived that the value of the vehicle is only Rs.15,13,411/-. As discussed earlier the vehicle including tax, valuable accessories, TDS etc will be Rs.16,03,808/- and not Rs. 15,13,411/- as claimed by the complainant.
Complainant is claiming an amount of Rs.2 lakhs on account of compensation from the opposite party. It is not known what mental agony as sustained by PW1. As discussed earlier even the complainant itself is vague and amount of Rs.2 lakh is claimed at the relief portion on account of unnecessary harassment to the complainant. According to as complainant is not entitled for any amount on account of compensation. These points are found accordingly.
Point No.
In the result, complainant is allowed in part.
A) Complainant is allowed to realize an amount of Rs.6,778/- along with interest @ of 9% from 24/7/2017 (Ext.B4 Invoice date) till realization from the opposite party.
B) Complainant is allowed to realize an amount of Rs.1000/- was cost from the opposite party.
The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him corrected by me and pronounced in open Commission on this the 21st day of December, 2021.
Sri.S.Santhosh Kumar(President)
Smt. Sholy.P.R (Member)
