Orissa

Debagarh

CC/38/2020

Rajesh Kumar Samal, age 29 years, S/O-Pradeep Kumar Samal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Trupti Ranjan Das, The Proprietor, SHRRE MOTORS, (Used Car Dealer) - Opp.Party(s)

18 Jun 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, DEOGARH

C.C NO-38/2020

Present-Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Smt. Arati Das, Member .

 

Rajesh Kumar Samal, age 29 years,

S/O-Pradeep Kumar Samal,

At-Vill/P.O- Basaloi,

P.S/Dist-Deogarh.                                                                                                     ...Complainant.

Vrs.

Trupti Ranjan Das,

The Proprietor,

SHRRE MOTORS,

(Used Car Dealer)

At -1375/1764,Bramheswar Patna,

Tankapani Road, Bhubaneswar.                                                                             ....O.P.

 

            Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant        :-                     Self.
2. For the O.P                      :-                     None.

 

DATE OF HEARING : 28.05.2021, DATE OF ORDER : 18.06.2021

SRI DIPAK KUMAR MAHAPATRA,PRESIDENT:-Brief facts of the case is that, the Complainant has decided to purchase a used Bolero and made contact with the O.P. and executed a Deed of Agreement on dtd. 18.03.2020 to purchase an used Bolero bearing registration number-OD-02-AX-9342 for a consideration amount of Rs 6,80,000/-. He paid Rs. 80,000/- on the day of agreement and another Rs.1,00,000/- through NEFT on dtd. 23.03.2020  i.e in total of Rs.1,80,000/- as advance to the O.P. The rest amount of  Rs.5,00,000/- was agreed to be paid at the time of delivery of the Bolero along with all related documents. As per the agreement, the O.P shall return the advance amount of Rs.1,80,000/- within next ninety days if the O.P shall not delivered the Bolero within sixty days of the date of agreement.  Again the Complainant paid Rs. 1,20,000/- through NEFT on dtd. 06.05.2020 and Rs. 7,000/- for documentation i.e Rs.3,07,000/- in total, the Complainant has paid to the O.P. As the O.P did not deliver the Bolero within the agreed period of sixty days, on dtd. 25.05.2020 the Complainant made contact and aggrieved on the matter of violating the terms and condition of Deed of Agreement. Thereafter  the O.P in order to return the booking amount, sent two post dated cheques to the Complainant  i.e dtd.13.07.2020  relating to Indus Ind Bank vide no-856067 and 856068 for an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- and Rs.1,57,000/- respectively. On submission of the said cheques for collection at State Bank of India Deogarh Branch, the cheques were returned dishonored on the ground of “Funds Insufficient” on dtd. 31.08.2020. An intimation was given to the O.P through writing on dtd. 11.08.2020 to settle the matter by returning the amount paid for the purchase of the used Bolero but the O.P shown his callousness to this matter. Being an unemployed person, the Complainant opted to avail a used/secondhand Bolero at low price and earn money by engage the same in transport business. But due to the negligence and irresponsible nature of the O.P the complainant sustained financial loss, mental pain and agony which amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice as neither has he returned the money nor he has delivered the Bolero. Hence the complainant constrained to seek relief in this Commission.

The O.P despite of service of notice he did not bother to appear before this Commission thus challenging the allegations made by the Complainant. So taking it in to consideration the above fact, this Commission has rightly decided to dispose the case as well setting the O.P as ex-parte in this case. Hence hearing conducted exparte under Rule-6 of Order-9 of Civil Procedure Code.

POINTS OF DETERMINATION:-

1. Whether the Complainant is comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act-2019?
2. Whether the O.Ps has committed any Deficiency in Service to the Complainant?

 

From the above discussion and materials available on records we inferred that the Complainant comes under the purview of Consumers as he has executed an agreement to purchase an used Bolero and paid advance of Rs.1,80,000/- as advance to the O.P.  It is admitted that the complainant had booked the used Bolero by depositing Rs.1,80,000/- with the OP through NEFT regarding which the receipt  was issued to him on dtd.20.03.2020 by Central Bank of India. According to the complainant he was assured that the Bolero would be delivered to him within 60 days from the date of booking of the vehicle as mentioned in Agreement. We are therefore, of the opinion that at the time of booking, an assurance was given to the complainant that the vehicle would be delivered within 60 days from the date of delivery but it was not delivered as promised. But surprisingly the O.P return the advance /booking amount of Rs. 3,07,000/- to the Complainant in shape of cheques which were dishonored by the concerned bank. We are therefore, of the opinion that the O.P who had been withholding the amount of Rs.1,80,000/-had an ulterior motive of keeping the said amount because it was expected to earn interest thereon and it delayed the payment of the same to the complainant for mala fide reasons. On the other hand by withholding the said amount the OP was causing a financial loss to the complainant, because he would have earned interest thereon or would have invested the said amount in some profit generation. It was therefore, mala fide intention on the part of OP that it did not deliver the Bolero to the complainant.  It is not only deficiency in service but an unfair trade practice on the part of OP whereby it not only delayed delivery of the vehicle but also delayed the payment of the deposited amount and when the same was demanded, the O.P has issued cheques which were ultimately dishonored. This matter has been well settled in the case of “Ravinder Raj vs M/S. Competent Motors Co. Pvt. ... on 10 February, 2011” decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Hence we order as under:-

 

ORDER

The Complaint petition is allowed. The O.P is directed to return the amount of Rs.3,07,000/- which was paid at the time of booking of the used Bolero with 9% interest  per annum from the date of filing the complaint, i.e., dtd. 16.09.2020 till its realisation." The O.P is further directed to pay Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh)as compensation and Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) towards the cost of litigation. All the above orders are to be carried out within 30 (Thirty) days of receiving of this order, failing which, the complainant is at liberty to proceed in due process of law.

Order pronounced in the open court today i.e, on 18^th day of June-2021 under my hand and seal of this Commission.

Office is directed to supply copies of the Order to the parties free of costs receiving acknowledgement of the delivery thereof.

I agree,                                                                                             

 

MEMBER.                                                                                          PRESIDENT.

                                                     Dictated and Corrected

                                                                   By me.

           

 

                                                                 PRESIDENT.