Sumanta Kumar Mahalik filed a consumer case on 22 Sep 2017 against The Propietor,Bajapayee Bajaj in the Cuttak Consumer Court. The case no is CC/7/2016 and the judgment uploaded on 29 Dec 2017.
Orissa
Cuttak
CC/7/2016
Sumanta Kumar Mahalik - Complainant(s)
Versus
The Propietor,Bajapayee Bajaj - Opp.Party(s)
M K Nayak
22 Sep 2017
ORDER
IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK.
C.C No.07/2016
Sumanta Kumar Mahalik,
At:Nanda Hatapalli,PO:Kendupalli,
PS:Baideswar,Dist:Cuttack,
PIN-754009.
… Complainant.
Vrs.
The Proprietor,
Bajapayee Bajaj, Authoriised dealer
of Bajaj Auto Ltd.,
At/PO/Dist:- Nayagarh
The Branch Manager,
H.D.F.C Bank,Santiniketan Building,
Jholasahi,Cuttack-753001. … Opp. Parties.
Present: Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,President.
Sri Bichitrananda Tripathy, Member.
Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member(W).
Date of filing: 12.01.2016
Date of Order: 22.09.2017
For the complainant : Sri M.K.Nayak,Advocate & Associates.
For the O.P.1 : None
For the O.P No.2 : Mr. N.K.Dash,Adv. & Associates.
Smt. Sarmistha Nath,Member(W).
The complainant being a consumer has filed this complaint before this Forum against the O.Ps for redressal of his grievances under the Consumer Protection Act,1986(Act in short) in terms of his prayer made in the complaint petition. The allegation made in the complaint is with regard to defects in the goods purchased by him and deficiency in service provided and unfair trade practice adopted by the O.Ps.
Case of the complainant stated in brief is that on 21.10.14 the complainant purchased a “Bajaj Platina” motor cycle, bearing chassis NolMD2-AIATA-ZIDRA-12962 and engine No.DZZRDA 12599 from the O.P No.1 who is the authorized dealer of the Bajpayee Bajaj Auto Ltd.
The complainant consulted with the Financial Company (Amit Agency) through the O.P No.1 for sanction of loan to meet the cost of the vehicle with a condition to pay monthly installments. The complainant paid down payment of Rs.11,000/- on 21.10.2014 and took delivery of the vehicle and further paid Rs.7,000/- on 11.02.2015 for registration and insurance of the said vehicle. The complainant submitted the personal data and deposited the amount before the O.P.1 and thereafter time and again visited the O.P No.1 for supply of his R.C.Book and insurance certificate and the O.P assured him to provide the said documents very soon but the O.P No.1 did not hand over the documents and went on harassing the complainant on some plea or other. The complainant brought to the notice of the O.P No.1 that without R.C book and insurance the vehicle cannot play on the road but the O.P No.1 assured him to supply but lastly on 25.6.2015 when the complainant asked about the documents, the O.P No.1 demanded more money for registration of the vehicle and insurance. The vehicle now is kept inside the house of the complainant as it was earlier in the show room. The O.P denied to return documents of the vehicle and demanded Rs.7000/-. The complainant sent a lawyer’s notice on 15.07.2015 requesting the O.P to return documents. The O.P.1 did not respond regarding settlement of the claim.
The O.P.1 filed written version through his advocate stating that claim should be filed by the complainant in Nayagarh Jurisdiction as the Proprietor intimated all his customers regarding the jurisdiction. He further stated that neither the Proprietor nor his staff received legal notice and prayed for a direction to the complainant to file his claim in Nayagarh Jurisdiction or put forth his claim before the organization as the organization is ready to have a peaceful settlement. But the O.P.1 did not appear on the date of hearing.
O.P.2 though appeared but did not file its written version but participated in the hearing.
We have heard the parties at length and gone through the documents filed by the parties. We have observed that the complainant purchased a motor cycle from O.P No.1 through finance availed from O.P No.2. The complainant had paid a total sum of Rs.18,000/- of which Rs.11,000/- was paid on 21.10.2014 and Rs.7000/- was paid on 11.02.2015. A loan was arranged from O.P No.2 for the purpose. The complainant alleged that Rs.11,000/- was paid towards down payment and Rs.7,000/- was paid towards insurance and registration. In spite of several requests made by the complainant O.P No.1 did not handover the insurance papers/papers relating to registration to the complainant. Since O.P No.1 did not attend the enquiry nor submitted any written version we have concluded that O.P No.1 has nothing to say in his defense and we are constrained to accept the uncontroverted statement of the complainant.
Basing on the facts and circumstances, it is observed that O.P No.1 is deficient in service.
ORDER
O.P No.1 will refund a sum of Rs.7000/- to the complainant as received from the complainant on 11.02.2015. O.P No.1 will also pay a sum of Rs.7000/- to the complainant towards mental agony and a further sum of Rs.3000/- towards cost of litigation. In total O.P No.1 will refund a sum of Rs.17,000/- to the complainant within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of this order,fialing which the complainant is at liberty to take shelter of this Hon’ble Forum as per C.P.Act.
Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble Member in the Open Court on this the 22nd day of September,2017 under the seal and signature of this Forum.
( Smt. Sarmistha Nath )
Member (W) (Sri D.C.Barik)
Pesident.
(Sri B.N.Tripathy )
Member
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.