BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. P. SUDHIR                                       :  PRESIDENT

SMT. R. SATHI                                         :  MEMBER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR                                  : MEMBER

C.C. No. 459/2014 Filed on 21.11.2014

ORDER DATED: 30.05.2015

Complainant:

Prof. Lizzy Cyriac, W/o Cyriac Philip, No. 4, Kesare 3^rd Stage, R.S. Naidu Nagar, Mysore-570 007, Karnataka.

                                      (Party in person)

Opposite party:

The Proprietor, S.M Car Beauty Clinic, Maruthankuzhi, Vettamukku Road, Vattiyoorkavu P.O, Thiruvananthapuram-695 013.

This case having been heard on 21.04.2015, the Forum on 30.05.2015 delivered the following:

ORDER

SRI. P. SUDHIR:  PRESIDENT

Complainant’s case is that on 29.07.2014 complainant and her husband were going to Thiruvananthapuram with their Scoda Fabia car KA-55-M-4024 and the car started giving some technical problems near Kollam.  Local mechanic advised them to approach a better place for the repair of the said problem.  Then they approached the opposite party.  Whereas on 30^th morning at around 11.00 am the above proprietor called her husband and told that the rectifier, regulator of the starter, oil kit, engine oil and its filter have to be replaced.  Whereas at around 4.30 pm on the same day complainant and her husband came to workshop and they delivered the said car to complainant’s husband with a bill for Rs. 25,000/- and they were shocked to see such a huge bill which they have never imagined.  However the proprietor forced the complainant and her husband to pay Rs. 24,000/- before taking the delivery of the said car.  After a few days once again the same problem started with said vehicle.  Complainant and her husband approached Rahul’s Car Spa at Mysore and after thoroughly inspecting the vehicle Mr. Rahul of Rahul’s Car Spa said none of the parts stated above have been replaced by the opposite party.  Opposite party has just cleaned the started brush and washed the body of the car which at the most would have costed a maximum of Rs. 3,000/-.  This clearly shows that opposite party had cheated the complainant and her husband and grabbed her hard earned money to the extent of Rs. 24,000/-.  There is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party and complainant approached this Forum for relief of compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- and costs. 

Notice sent to opposite party.  Opposite party accepted notice and neither appeared nor filed version.  Opposite party set exparte.

Issues:-

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs sought for?

Complainant filed chief examination of affidavit and Exts. P1 to P9 marked. 

Points (i) & (ii):- Perusing the evidence and exhibits it is seen that complainant is the owner of the car as per Ext. P9 and she along with her husband travelled to Thiruvananthapuram and there arise some technical problem in the car and complainant along with her husband approached the opposite party.  The invoice issued by opposite party (Ext. P1) is in the name of the husband of the complainant.  Since the opposite party is exparte, the evidence produced by the complainant remained unchallenged.  We have no other go but to go along with evidence of the complainant.  Relying on Ext. P4 it is seen that there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party.  If opposite party has got a genuine case opposite party might have sent reply notice and contested the matter.  Complainant is entitled for reimbursement of the amount fraudulently accepted by the opposite party from complainant’s husband.  Opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 24,000/- to the complainant and compensation amount of Rs. 10,000/- and cost of Rs. 3,000/-. 

In the result, complaint is allowed and opposite party is directed to reimburse the collected amount of Rs. 24,000/- and compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and cost of Rs. 3,000/- to the complainant within one month from the date of order failing which the complainant is entitled for interest at the rate of 9% for the whole amount from the date of receipt of this order. 

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. 

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 30^th day of May 2015.

         Sd/-

P.SUDHIR                             : PRESIDENT

         Sd/-

R. SATHI                               : MEMBER

          Sd/-

LIJU B. NAIR                        : MEMBER

jb

C.C. No. 459/2014

APPENDIX

  I      COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

                             NIL

 II      COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

P1     - Copy of cash bill dated 30.07.2014 from O.P for Rs. 7,228/-.

P2     - Copy of cash bill dated 30.07.2014 from O.P for Rs. 18,624.94/-.

P3     - Copy of bill No. 1002 dated 06.08.2014 from Rahul’s Kar Spa &

             Tyre Care.

P4     - Copy of report dated 12.08.2014 given by Rahul’s Kar Spa and Tyre

             Care.

P5     - Copy of notice dated 13.08.2014 sent by complainant to O.P

P6     - Copy of acknowledgement card

P7     - Copy of advocate notice dated 30.09.2014

P8     - Copy of acknowledgement card.

P9     - Copy of certificate of registration issued by Registering Authority,

             Mysore.

III      OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

                             NIL

 IV     OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:

                             NIL

                                                                                                      Sd/-

PRESIDENT

jb