Date of filing      :  01-04-2015

                                                                       Date of order     :  23-06-2015

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                             CC.84/2015

                      Dated this, the   23^rd  day of   June   2015

PRESENT:

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                         : PRESIDENT

SMT.K.G.BEENA                                          : MEMBER

SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL                               : MEMBER

Govindan Kutty.C.P,                                               : Complainant

‘Krishna Kripa’, Kalikkadavu,

Kasaragod.Dt. 671310

1 Manager, Indus Motors,                                       : Opposite parties

   Near (KNSGHSS) Pilicode.

2 Manager, Indus Motors,

   Saidarpally, Thalassery. 670102

(Ops 1 & 2 Exparte)

                                                            O R D E R

SMT.P.RAMADEVI, PRESIDENT

            That the complainant Mr.Govindankutty, Ex-servicemen filed this  complaint against opposite parties alleging deficiency in service.

            The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant approached 1^st opposite party for purchasing a Swift  car of Maruthi Suzuki company and booked one car on paying Rs.1000/-.  On 23-02-2015 he taken a quotation of VXI model from 1^st opposite party and as per quotation the price of the car was Rs.4,95,244/-. Before giving the quotation the 1^st  opposite party made believe the complainant that the price of the car VXI model is Rs.4,95,244/-.  The complainant  submitted the quotation with other necessary documents  required  for purchasing the vehicle before the Indian Navel Canteen service and obtained the authorization letter for purchase of Motor vehicles with CSD benefits on 24-02-2015.  On 25-02-2015 the complainant paid Rs.5,54,601/- through Kerala Gramin Bank, Kalikkadavu Branch to 1^st opposite party.  On 28-02-2015 the 1^st opposite party delivered the car to the complainant and given the bill also.  In the bill the price of the car is shown was Rs.5,01,011/-.  Then the complainant enquired about the price variation and the 1^st opposite party replied that the price of the car was changed on 21-02-2015 and they were not aware of the charge of price while issuing the quotation.  Then the complainant again enquired about the matter to 2^nd opposite party and they have not given a satisfactory reply.  Then complainant constrained  to pay 8% Road Tax since the price of the vehicle is above 5 lakhs and also paid Rs.5767/- as the variation in actual price and quotation price.  The complainant paid Rs.16,133/- to the company in addition to the  price  quoted in the quotation.  According to the complainant the act of opposite party i.e misrepresentation amounts to deficiency in service and he suffered mentally and economically. Hence this complaint is filed for necessary relief.

2.         On admission of complainant the Forum  issued notice to both opposite parties.  Opposite parties were duly served notice and not turned up.  Name of both opposite parties were called absent, set exparte.

3.         Complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts A1 to A4 were marked.  Ext.A1 invoice, Ext.A2 sale certificate.  Ext.A3 is the reply letter issued by 1^st opposite party and Ext.A4 is the tax licence.

4.         The specific case of the complainant is that only because of the misrepresentation made byt eh 1^st opposite party he purchased the Swift VXI model car by spending more than Rs.5 lakhs.  Thereby he suffered mentally and economically.  On going through the entire facts in records and on perusal of the documents we are of the view that the opposite parties made a misrepresentation to the complainant and induced him to purchase the Swift VXI model car.  In Ext.A2 it is specifically stated that on February 21^st onwards the price of the above said car was changed.   The quotation was issued on 25-02-2015.  That itself shows the opposite party misleaded the complainant to purchase the above vehicle.  There is no contra evidence before the Forum.  Therefore we are of the opinion that there is deficiency on the part of opposite parties.

            Hence the complaint is allowed and opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally directed to pay Rs.16,133/- being the loss sustained to the complainant and further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and sufferings and pay cost of Rs.2000/- to the complainant.  Time for compliance is 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.

Sd/-                                                     Sd/-                                                      Sd/-

MEMBER                                                             MEMBER                                                             PRESIDENT

Exts.

A1.25-2-2015 Invoice.

A2.Sale Certificate

A3. 7-3-2015 Letter issued by Op to complainant

A4. Tax licence.

PW1. Govindan Kutty.C.P.

  Sd/-                                                                         Sd/-                                                                        Sd/-

MEMBER                                                             MEMBER                                                             PRESIDENT

Pj/                                                                    Forwarded by Order

                                                               SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT