Haryana

Bhiwani

CC/48/2018

Balwan Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Vikas Treding Co. - Opp.Party(s)

H.S Paharis

29 Oct 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHIWANI.

 

                  Consumer Complaint No. :  48 of 2018

                  Date of Institution             : 19.03.2018

                                                           Date of Decision               : 29.10.2024

 

Balwan Sharma son of Sh. Ram Singh R/o village Pahari, Tehsil Loharu, District Bhiwani.

          ……Complainant

 

Versus

 

M/s Vikas Trading Company, authorized Dealer Farmtrac Tractors Loharu Road, Bhiwani through its Manager/authorized signatory.

 

….. Opposite Party

 

COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT, 1986.

 

BEFORE:     Mrs. Saroj Bala Bohra, Presiding Member.

Ms. Shashi Kiran Panwar, Member.

 

Present:-      Sh. Rajender Kumar Gora, Advocate for complainant.

                    Sh. Satender Ghanghas, Advocate for OP.

 

ORDER

 

Saroj Bala  Bohra, Presiding Member.

 

1.                 Brief facts of the present complaint are that complainant purchased Farmtrac Tractor Model 45 Valvemax O/B Classic from OP in a sum of Rs.5,35,714/- after getting exchanged his old tractor make Escort-450 for Rs.1.00 lac. It is stated that after giving Rs.50,000/- in cash, rest of the amount of Rs. 3,85,714/- was got financed from OP, however, the financed amount was shown as Rs.4,50,000/-. Thus complainant has alleged that OP taken Rs.64,286/- in excess from him and he is entitled to get back the said amount. But the amount was not return by the OP despite issuance of legal notice dated 02.02.2018.  It is also stated that as per scheme of OP, free gift of motorcycle on the purchased tractor had also not been provided to the complainant. Hence, the present complaint has been preferred by complainant alleging deficiency in service resulting into mental and physical harassment besides monetary loss. In the end, prayer has been made to direct the OP to pay Rs.64,286/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of purchase of the tractor till its actual payment. Further to pay Rs.30,000/- as compensation for harassment. Any other relief, to which this Commission deems fit, has also been sought.

2.                 Upon notice, OP appeared through counsel and tendered reply raising preliminary objections qua maintainability of the complaint, locus standi, mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties  and suppression of material facts. On merits, it is stated that the tractor Farmtrac was purchased by complainant on 12.10.2017 vide invoice no.44 for Rs.6.00 lac including 12% GST. Complainant paid Rs.50,000/- in cash and Rs.1.00 lac as exchange value of the old tractor, as such, Rs.4,50,000/- was remaining towards the complainant. It is submitted that complainant got financed the tractor from L & T Finance company for Rs.4.50 lac. It is denied that the tractor was having horse power of 48 HP as averred in the complaint. It is stated that out of said amount, Rs.4,43,121/- was paid on 16.10.2017 by the financier company to the answering OP and thus Rs.6879/- was unpaid. It is stated that complainant paid Rs.20,000/- to the answering OP for the purposes of registration of the tractor as well as payment of Rs.6879/-. Out of the said amount, Rs.6879/- was charged as remaining amount and Rs.10,353/- for insurance of the tractor and Rs.3000/- for registration certificate of the tractor.  The free gift scheme was a lucky draw launched by manufacturer of the tractor, but complainant did not win any prized in the scheme.  Apart from the above, no other amount was charged from the complainant. As such, the Op denied for any deficiency in service on its part and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

4.                 In evidence of complainant, his affidavit Ex. CW1/A alongwith documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-8 were tendered and closed the evidence on 29.08.2022.

5.                 In evidence of OP,  affidavit Ex. RW1/A  of Sh. Dharavir Garg, Proprietor of OP company alongwith  documents Annexure R-1 to Annexure R-7  were tendered and closed the evidence on 19.0.2023.

6.                 We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record minutely.

7.                 At the outset, from the purchase invoice of the tractor (Annexure C-7 & Annexure R-2), it is evident that the tractor was of Rs.6.00 lac including CGST and SGST @ 6% each.  Admittedly, the complainant has paid Rs.1,50,000/- to the OP and thus Rs.4.50 lac, as per Annexure C-5, was rightly loaned to the complainant on 14.10.2017. As per  statement of accounts ( Annexure R-5), Rs.4,43,121/- was disbursed to the OP company by the financier on 16.10.2017 and thus Rs.6879/- was due towards the complainant.  Undisputedly, the OP has received the amount of Rs.20,000/- from complainant and used it for insurance of the vehicle, Registration Certificate charges of the vehicle and remaining adjusted toward the dues of Rs.6879/- towards the complainant.

8.                 In view of the above, we do not find any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of OP and the defence of OP is very obvious to dismiss the claim of complainant. As such, the complaint is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Certified copies of this order be sent to parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.       

Announced.

Dated:29.10.2024