IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ALAPPUZHA

            Thursday  the 7^th   day of  April, 2022.

                              Filed on 20.03.2021

Present

1. Sri.S.Santhosh Kumar  BSc.,LL.B  (President )
2. Smt. C.K.Lekhamma, B.A.L, LLB (Member)In

                                       CC/No.74/2021

Between

Complainants:-                                          Opposite parties-

1.  Sri.Sajan M.P.,                                      1.       The Managing Director,

    Prabha Nilayam,                                         T.V.Sundaram Iyengar and Sons, 

    Thanneermukkom,                                              Corporate Office, 7-B

    Cherthala,                                                           West Veli Street, Periyar,     

    Alappuzha.                                                 Madurai Main, Madurai,

    Ph: 7012980493                                          Tamil Nadu – 625 001.

2. Arjun S.,                                                 2.         The Managing Director,

    S/o Sajan. M.P.,                                                  Renault India Private Limited,

    Thanneermukkom,                                              Head Office AVS Remana

    Cherthala,                                                           Towers, 37-38,4^th Floor,    

    Alappuzha.                                                         Venkita Narayana Roazd,

    (Party in Person)                                     T-Nagar,Chennai, Tamil Nadu.

                                                                   3.         The  Head of   Office

                                                                             Renault India Private Limited,

                                                                             Sales  and Marketing, Plot No.11,

                                                                             3^rd Floor, Sector- 32, 

                                                                             Institutional Area, Gurgaon,

                                                                             Haryana- 122002.                                                                        

                                                                   4.       The Manager in Charge,

                                                                        C/o The Manager  (H & R),

                                                                        T.V.Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Pvt.Ltd.,                                                                                                               .                                                                       No.34/2765.NH-17, Kaloor,    

                                                                        Opposite International Stadium,                                                                     

                                                                        Ernakulam – 682 017.

                                                                   5. The Branch Manager,

                                                                        T.V.Sundaram Iyengar and Sons,                                                                                                               .                                                                       Paravur, Alappuzha,

C/o The Manager  (H&R)                                                                 T.V.Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Pvt.Ltd.,                                                                                                                                                                                                No.34/2765.NH-17, Kaloor,   

                                                                        Opposite International Stadium,                                                                    

                                                                        Ernakulam – 682 017                                                                                  

                                                                   6.       Sri.Praveen.M.S., Sales Manager, 

                                                                        T.V.Sundaram Iyengar and Sons,                                                                                                                                                                                  Paravur, Alappuzha,

                                                                        C/o The Manager  (H&R) 

T.V.Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Pvt.Ltd.,                                                                  No.34/2765.NH-17, Kaloor,   

                                                                        Opposite International Stadium,                                                                    

                                                                        Ernakulam – 682 017                                                                                          

                                                                   7. Sri.Saafvan.T.N.,Sales Executive,

                                                                        T.V.Sundaram Iyengar and Sons,                                                                                                                                                                                  Paravur, Alappuzha,

                                                                        C/o The Manager  (H&R) 

T.V.Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Pvt.Ltd.,                                                                                                               No.34/2765.NH-17, Kaloor,   

                                                                        Opposite International Stadium,                                                                    

                                                                        Ernakulam – 682 017                                                                                   

                                                                   8. Sri.Aneesh, Sales Consultant,

                                                        T.V.Sundaram Iyengar and Sons,                                                                                                                                                                                  Paravur, Alappuzha,

                                                                        C/o The Manager  (H&R) 

                                                                        T.V.Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Pvt.Ltd.,                                                                                                               .                                                                       No.34/2765.NH-17, Kaloor,   

                                                                        Opposite International Stadium,                                                                    

                                                                        Ernakulam – 682 017                                                                                  

                                                      (Ops 1,4,5,6&7–rep by Advs.M/s.Krishna Menon &                                        .                                                       C.Muraleedharan, Ops 2, 3 and 8 exparte))

O R D E R

SRI. S.SANTHOSH KUMAR (PRESIDENT)

Complaint filed under Sec.35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

1.       Material averments briefly discussed are as follows:-

2^nd complainant is the son of 1^st complainant.  Opposite parties are the officials of various motor companies.  1^st complainant owned a Maruti Swift Car.  Complainants wanted to purchase a Renault triber car and accordingly they contacted M/s T.V Sundaram Iyengar & Sons who is a dealer at Paravoor, Alappuzha.  8^th opposite party Sri.Aneesh visited the house of the complainants and explained various features of the model of the car.  He offered an exchange value of Rs.20,000/-for the swift car. 

2.       During July 2020 complainants reached the showroom and met 6^th opposite party M/s M.S Praveen and 7^th opposite party M/s Mr.T.N Safvan and discussed about the matter.  Accordingly they booked a car on 12.08.2020 through online and on 21.08.2020 purchased the vehicle for Rs.6,57,900/- being the price of the vehicle and the total amount was Rs.8,45,392/- including registration, road tax, insurance, accessories etc.   However though on 20.08.2020 entire amount was paid the vehicle was delivered only after a week ie, on 28.08.2020.  While going through the records of the vehicle it was noticed that the vehicle was not a brand new one but was manufactured during February 2020 ie, 6 months back.  The vehicle was not having fresh/ new appearance and instead the vehicle had a dirty / shabby appearance.  The paints were blurred over the black part of the body at the time of the delivery.  It was felt that the vehicle was a used one.  At the time of handing over the vehicle it had run 242.8 Kms as per the meter reading.  When these matters were discussed with 8^th opposite party Sri.Aneesh he told to inform the matter to the manager.

3.       On the date of delivery of the vehicle ie, on 28.08.2020 there were complaints to the vehicle.  When it was reported to the dealer he asked to bring the vehicle to the workshop.  The relay was replaced at the workshop with an old one.   Subsequently several other problems also developed to the vehicle which is due to manufacturing defects.  There were sounds in the engine and the gear box and there was heavy vibration. Though it was informed to the dealer there was no response.  Complainants apprehended that the vehicle had manufacturing defect even at the time of delivery.  Though complainants requested to replace the defective one with a new one the request was turned down. 

4.       Though it was offered that an amount of Rs.20,000/-  will be given as exchange bonus it was not paid yet.  It was noticed that opposite parties had provided the complainants with a used car with manufacturing and technical defects and thereby cheated them.  It amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.  Hence the complaint is filed for realizing an amount of Rs.8,25,392/- being the amount collected from the complainants along with interest @ 15%  from 21.08.2020, to refund Rs.20,000/- which was offered as exchange bonus along with interest and Rs.3 lakhs as compensation for providing complainants with a used car with manufacturing and technical defects. Complainants are also claiming an amount of Rs.3 lakhs as compensation for the untold sufferings, distress and disappointment and is also claiming an amount of Rs.2 lakhs as cost. 

5.       Opposite parties 1,4 and 5 filed a version  mainly contenting as follows:-

The complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts.  Complainants are not consumers as defined under S.2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act.  Complainants have no case that there was any deficiency in service on the part of these opposite parties.  Complainants had booked for and subsequently taken delivery of the Renault triber car after being fully convinced of the features of the said car and expressing full satisfaction.  There is no merit or basis in the allegation of the complainants that there was inordinate delay of one week in delivering the car.  1^st complainant booked the car on 21.08.2020 and a new car was delivered to him on 28.08.2020 within a week of booking.  In the present pandemic situation prevailing throughout the country and the restrictions that had been imposed by the Central/ State Government in opening of the dealership, a delay of one week in delivery of the car cannot be said to be inordinate or willful.  The outlet at Alappuzha was not permitted to open and hence the vehicle was delivered from the Mavelikkara office at their residence.  The allegation that the paint of the car delivered to the complainants was found to be blurred and that it was used by someone else is misplaced and without merit.  The car delivered to the complainants is one has received from the manufacturer and was at no point of time used by any other person as alleged by the complainants. 

6.       There is no merit or basis \in the allegation that the car delivered to them suffered from manufacturing defect.  There was a complaint about relay system and it was duly attended under warranty and it was not a manufacturing defect.  There was no sound from the engine or the gear box as alleged.

7.       The claim for exchange bonus made by the complainants is misplaced and without merit.  At the time of booking the new car complainants had specifically informed that they would be entitled to an exchange bonus of Rs.20,000/- for their old car provided the said car was registered in the name of the 1^st complainant or in the name of his family members.  The car bearing registration No.KL 32 D 4400 for which the 1^st complainant had sought exchange bonus was seen sold and registered in the name of one Smt.Soumya, W/o Dasan with effect from 07.08.2020. Since the car was booked on 21.08.2020 there was no car in the name of complainants and so they are not entitled to get exchange bonus.  There was no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice from the part of these opposite parties.  Complainants are not entitled for any amount as compensation.  Hence the complaint may be dismissed with cost.

8.       Opposite parties 6 and 7 filed a version mainly contenting as follows:-

These opposite parties are officers/ sales executives of M/s T.V Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Pvt.Ltd.  and have no personal dealing with the complainants other than discharging their duty.  These opposite parties cannot in law or on facts be held personally liable for the loss, if any, as alleged in the complaint. 

9.       Opposite parties 1, 4 and 5 have filed a detailed version refuting the various allegations raised in the complaint.  The said contentions may be treated as part of this version also.  Hence it is prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with cost.

10.     Opposite parties 2,3 and 8 remained exparte.

11.     On the above pleadings following points were raised for consideration:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties as alleged in the complaint?
2. Whether the complainants are entitled to realise an amount of Rs.8,25,392/- from the opposite parties as alleged?
3.  Whether the complainants are entitled to realise an amount of Rs.20,000/- along with interest from the opposite parties being the exchange value of their old Swift car?
4. Whether the complainants are entitled to realise an amount of Rs.3 lakhs as compensation for supplying a used car with manufacturing defect as alleged?
5. Whether the complainants are entitled to realise an amount of Rs.3 lakhs as compensation for mental agony, untold sufferings, distress etc. as prayed for?
6. Reliefs and cost?

12.     Evidence in this case consists of the oral evidence of PW1 and Exts.A1 to A9, A10 series and A11 series, A12 and A13 from the side of the complainants and the oral evidence of RW1and Ext.B1 to B4 from the side of opposite parties.

13.     PW1 is the 1^st complainant in this case.  He filed an affidavit in tune with the complaint and marked Ext. A1 to A9, A10 series and A11 series, A12 and A13. 

14.     RW1 is the 6^th opposite party in this case.  He filed an affidavit in tune with the version and marked Ext.B1 to B4.

15.     2^nd  complainant is the son  of 1^st complainant. They purchased  a Renault Triber car from M/s TVS Iyengar and sons, the 1^st oppostie party  from their  branch office at Paravoor, Alappuzha.  According to them they  experienced lot of complaints with the vehicle such as delay in delivery, manufacturing defect,  finishing of the vehicle, sound from engine and gear box etc.  Though they sent a notice to the opposite parties, their grievance was not redressed and hence the complaint was filed for refunding an amount of Rs.8,45,392/- along with interest,  refund of  Rs.20,000/- which was offered as exchange bonus,  Rs.6 lakh as compensation and Rs. 3 lakhs as costs.    Opposite parties 1,4 & 5 filed a version denying the allegations.  Opposite parties 6 & 7 filed a separate version by which also denied the allegations.  Opposite parties 2,3 & 8 remained exparte.  1^st complainant got examined as PW1 and marked Ext.A1 to A9, A10 & A11 series.  Later Ext.A12 & 13 were marked.  6^th opposite party got examined as RW1 and marked Ext.B1 to B4.  However it is noticed that the proof affidavit is seen filed by both complainants which is rather unheard off.  The allegations leveled in the complaint and proof affidavit can be summarized as follows.

(a)  There is delay in delivery of the vehicle. According to PW1 they booked the vehicle as per Ext.A2 on 12/8/2020 and the vehicle was delivered only on 28/8/2020 and so there is inordinate delay in delivery of the vehicle. On going through the records it is seen that Ext.A2 is a Preliminary Information Sheet by which Rs. 5000/- was given as advance.    Ext.A5 Tax Invoice shows that the balance amount was paid only on 21/8/2020. Admittedly the vehicle was delivered on 28/8/2020.    It is to be remembered that during March 2020 onwards there was a nationwide lockdown due to  Covid -19 pandemic. Here in this case the tax invoice was prepared on 21/8/2020 and the delivery was effected on 28/8/2020. So in effect there is a delay of only 7 days.  According to PW1 there is inordinate delay in delivering the vehicle.  Since the delay is only 7days, it cannot be considered as inordinate delay especially on account of nationwide lockdown due to covid-19 Pandemic.

(b)  The 2^nd allegation is that the vehicle manufactured during February 2020 was supplied to him during August 2020 and so the vehicle was 6 months old.

Admittedly the vehicle was delivered on 28/8/2020 and according to PW1 it was manufactured during February 2020 which is revealed from Ext.A12 copy of RC book.  As stated earlier from 25/3/2020 onwards there was nationwide lockdown on account of Covid-19 pandemic and the movement of the vehicles was restricted. Admittedly the vehicle was manufactured at Chennai Plant and so it is to be brought to Kerala to the dealer.    On account of this the contention that the vehicle was 6 months old is unsustainable.

(c)  Another contention raised is that the appearance of the vehicle was shabby and the  paint was blurred.  Admittedly the vehicle was supplied at the residence of complainants on 28/8/2020.  Ext.B2 is the instant feed back seen signed by PW1.  There were 7 points noted in Ext.B2.  For the 1^st four points the customer has ticked “completely satisfied” and the remaining three points the customer has ticked “mostly satisfied”.  It is an indication that there was no such complaint at the time of delivery.  Further it is to be noted that the vehicle was delivered on 28/8/2020 at the residence of complainants.  Ext.A7 is  a registered notice sent on 5/1/2021 to opposite parties 1,2 & 3.    Only in Ext.A7 notice complainants had alleged that the vehicle had defects.    It is to be remembered that the vehicle was delivered on 28/8/2020 and as per Ext.B2 it was completely satisfied and mostly satisfied. Normally if there is any complaint to the vehicle it will be informed to the opposite parties within a short time or atleast within  a month.  Here it is seen that though the  delivery was effected on 28/8/2020,   Ext.A7 notice was sent on 5/1/2021 ie, after about 4 months. Ext.A7 was promptly replied by  Ext.A8 on 21/3/2021.  Moreover no expert evidence is available except the  interested   un-corroborated  oral evidence of PW1 that the vehicle had shabby appearance or the  paints were blurred.

(e). Another  allegation leveled against the opposite parties is that the vehicle was a used one. According to PW1 the vehicle had run 242.8 kms at the time of delivery. According to opposite parties due to covid -19 pandemic there was a lockdown at Alappuzha and the vehicle was delivered from their Mavelikara office.  Admittedly the vehicle was delivered at the house of PW1 and so it has to run about 100 kms to reach Mavelikara to Thanneermukkom.  If that is deducted then the remaining is only 142.8 kms which normally occurs at the time of transferring the vehicle, pre-delivery inspection etc.    So the contention of the complainants that the vehicle was a used vehicle since it had already run 242.8 kms is un founded. 

(f) Another complaint is that on the date of delivery itself there was a relay complaint and it was replaced by old relay.  In the version filed by the opposite parties it was denied.  There is no acceptable evidence to show that the relay was replaced by old relay and so such an allegation is also un-founded.

(g)   Another allegation is that the vehicle had manufacturing defect. According to PW1 there was engine sound, gearbox sound, vibration at the time of reverse etc. It is true that PW1 has produced Ext.A11 series job cards issued by M/s. TV Sundran Iyengar and Sons Pvt. Ltd. Thiruvambady, Alappuzha issued at the time when it was produced for service.  It is also noticed that there was complaints of abnormal vibration etc.. However it has come out in evidence that the said complaints were rectified at the time of producing the vehicle for repairs.  During cross examination PW1 admitted that the defects have reduced now. PW1 has got an allegation that the vehicle had manufacturing defect.  However he has not taken steps to inspect the vehicle by an expert and produce the report to show that the vehicle had any manufacturing defect.  PW1 was examined on 29/1/2022 and the vehicle was delivered on 28/8/2020. Admittedly even now also, PW1 is using the vehicle. If the vehicle had any manufacturing defect or the defects as alleged by the complainant normally one will not be able to use the same. 

(j)   The last allegation in the complaint is that opposite parties had collected Rs.20004/- in excess than the offered price.  Ext.A6 is the customer account statement issued to the 2^nd complainant.  From Ext.A6 it is noticed that excess amount is shown as Rs. 20004/-.  On a reading of Ext.A6 it is seen that Rs. 20000/- is deducted as exchange discount.  According to the learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties at the time of booking complainants informed that they have a Maruti car and it can be exchanged at the time of delivery and so they deducted an amount of Rs.20,000/- as exchange discount.  However at the time of delivery it was noticed that complainants had already sold the vehicle to one Soumya and so they were unable to deduct the exchange offer of Rs.20000/-. To prove such a contention Ext.B4 was relied upon.  Ext.B4 is the certificate of registration of Maruti car bearing Reg. No.KL-32-D 4400 previously owned by PW1.   From Ext.B4 it is seen that on 7/8/2020 it was transferred in the name of Smt.Soumya, wife of Sri. Dasan. Admittedly the invoice was prepared on 21/8/2020 and so on that date PW1 had no vehicle in his name since it was already sold on 7/8/2020. So the opposite parties are justified in deducting the exchange bonus from their offer.  So in the light of the above discussion it can be seen that none of the allegations leveled against the complaints and in the joint proof affidavit filed by the complainants  are sustainable. In said circumstances there was no merit in the complaint and so it is only to be dismissed.  These points are found against the complainants

16.Point No.6.

In the result complaint is dismissed with cost of Rs.2000/-

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him corrected by me and pronounced in open Commission on this the 7^th   day of April, 2022.                                       

                                        Sd/-Sri.S.Santhosh Kumar(President)

Sd/-Smt. C.K.Lekhamma (Member)

Appendix:-Evidence of the complainant:-

PW1                     -     Sajan M.P.(1^st  Complainant)

Ext.A1                 -     Catalogue and Order Booking Form.

Ext.A2                 -     Preliminary  Information Sheet

Ext.A3                 -     Exchange Evaluation Form.

 Ext.A4                -     Customer declaration for Invoicing and Registration

Ext.A5                 -     Tax Invoice dt.21.8.2020.

Ext.A6                 -     Account Statement  dt.28.8.2020

Ext.A7                       -     Copy of Notice to the opposite parties (3 OPs)

Ext.A8                 -     Reply received from the Ops. 

Ext.A9                 -     Copy of whatsApp chat

Ext.A10 series     -     Copy of  Tax Invoices from the 5^th  O.P.

Ext.A11 series     -     Copy of Job Cards

Ext.A12               -     Copy of RC Book

Ext.A13               -     Vehicle User Manual                                                                                      -                     

Evidence of the opposite parties:-                           

RW1                     -    M.S.Praveen, Showroom Head  of  Alappuzha.

Ext.B1                  -    Billing details, Order booking Form with terms and conditions.

Ext.B2                  -    Instant Feed Back

Ext.B3                  -    Instructions issued by the manufacturer.

Ext.B4                  -    Certificate of Registration

///True Copy ///

To     

          Complainant/Oppo. party/S.F.

                                                                                                     By Order

                                                                                                 Assistant Registrar

Typed by:-Br/-

Compared by:-