Ld. Advocate(s)

                                    For Complainant: Subhasis Ray

                                    For OP/OPs : None

            Date of filing of the case                      :06.08.2021

            Date of Disposal  of the case              :14.12.2023

Final Order / Judgment dtd.14.12.2023

          The basic fact of the case is in brief  is that the complainant Navonil Nath at the time of purchasing  one Mahindra make XUV300 BS6 model 

(2)

CC/62/2021

from the OPs took  bank  loan. Accordingly  OP No.3 Rajdeep Das  on behalf of the OP No.1&2 being the Manager S.N. Motors Private Limited  and the Director S.N. Motors Private Limited, Village Mankara, P.S. Beharampore, District Murshidabad respectively gave one proforma  invoice dated 21.12.2020 in the name of the complainant  for a total cost  of Rs.13,53,924/- as ex-showroom  price of the vehicle  plus cost of registration , insurance  and lifetime  tax. Accordingly, on 21.12.2020 his bank authority sanctioned the loan in favour of the complainant  and the OP No.`1&2  issued Tax Invoice  on that very date in the name of the complainant.  They also delivered  the vehicle  on 21.12.2020 through RTGS. The OP S.N. Motors issued money receipt on that date in favour of the  complainant.  After a few days  of the purchase  the complainant  found that the said vehicle  was making some foul noise  during driving. Immediately  the complainant  went to the nearest  authorised  service  centre  at Krishnagar  namely M/S Motor  on 27.02.2021. After servicing  the vehicle  when the bill  was prepared  the complainant found that the bill was issued in the name of one Mujibar Rahaman  of 24 Parganas and also found that the  vehicle  was previously sold  on 15.12.2020 to the said Mujibar Rahaman. On enquiry  the service  providers  stated that  as per norms at the time of booking  of any new vehicle  the same was registered in the name of  the person who  booked  the vehicle  as purchaser  and if the vehicle  was delivered  the company  also  maintained  the date of delivery  with customer  code number.  The complainant  also came to know  for the first time  that the OP supplyed one second hand vehicle  after taking  ex-showroom  price of the vehicle from the complainant  and thereby  adopted  unfair trade practice . At the time of delivery  it was found  that the vehicle  was delivered  directly  from manufacturing  but  after getting  the bill from M/S S.N.Motors the complainant understood  that it was actually receipt  one Mujibar Rahaman  who subsequently  returned  the vehicle  for reasons  best known  to him. The OP has thus delivered  one second hand vehicle  after accepting  the full consideration  money from the  complainant due to which the  complainant  has been suffering  mental pain and agony. So this case  is filed.  The cause of action for the present  case arose on and from 21.12.2020 and is still continuing.  The complainant  prayed for a final decree  to take  back the disputed vehicle  and returned  the entire sum of Rs.13,22,924/- together  with interest,  Rs. 5,00,000/- towards compensation  and litigation cost of Rs.50,000/-.

From the case record  it transpires  that as per order  no. 11 dated 28.11.2022 the case  is decided to be heard ex-parte against OP No.1&2&3. The OP No.4 the Director Mahindra and Mahindra  filed W/V but subsequently  did not take any steps as per order no. 17 dated 23.06.2023. Thus OP No.4 after filing  W/V did not contest the case.

The complainant in order to  substantiate  the case adduced  both oral evidence in the form of affidavit in chief and proved some documents.  Although  OP No.1,3 & 4 filed W/V yet they did not lead any evidence  to substantiate  their defence case and finally case was heard  ex-parte  against them.  The complainant 

(3)

CC/62/2021

duly proved  the case through  the documentary  evidence and affidavit in chief. The complainant  proved  the money receipt  of payment money through RTGS from the S.N. Motors  Private Limited  for a sum of Rs.13,22,924/-. They also proved  the GST invoice  date 21.12.2021 for the said payment  of money  for purchasing  the  said vehicle  through  Punjab National Bank  as financer. The complainant  further proved  the delivery challan  dated 21.12.2020 for the said Mahindra and Mahindra  XUV 300 through the financer  PNB Krishnagar.  Proforma  invoice  issued by S.N. Motors  Private Limited  dated 21.12.2020 for the said vehicle  stand also proved  on behalf of  the complainant. The service  quotation  of S.N. Motors  Private Limited  is also proved  on behalf  of the complainant. The complainant  further proved  the R.O bill cum Tax  Invoice  dated 27.02.2021 for the said  vehicle wherefrom it is revealed that  the vehicle registration  no.WB52AZ 9671 was previously sold  to one Mujibar Rahaman.

The entire  oral and documentary  evidence  of the complainant  stands unchallenged  and undiscarded since the OP No.3 could not lead  any evidence on their behalf. Moreover,  the complainant  categorically  stated against  the questionnaire  filed by the OP No.4 that he exhibited  documentary  proved  of payment  of full consideration  of money  for the said vehicle.  He further answered  in positive against the  questionnaire  stating  categorically  that he had already  filed documentary  evidence in support of his claim.

Thus the  entire oral  and documentary  evidence  of the complainant  leads to hold  that the OPs sold  one presold car  to the complainant  and thereby has caused  unfair trade practice  for which the  complainant  suffered harassment , mental pain and agony which should be compensated  by money.

In the result the complaint case succeeds ex-parte with cost against the OPs.

Hence,

          It is

Ordered

                                                          that the complaint case no.CC/62/2021 be and the same is allowed ex-parte with cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) against the opposite parties. The complainant  Navonil Nath do get an award to return  the said vehicle  and refund  Rs.13,22,924/- (Rupees thirteen lakh twenty two thousand nine hundred twenty four) from the OPs jointly and severally,  Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) as compensation for unfair trade practice  and mental pain and agony.  The OPs are  directed to refund  Rs.13,22,924/- (Rupees thirteen lakh twenty two thousand nine hundred twenty four) plus  Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) plus Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) total Rs.14,32,924/- (Rupees fourteen lakh thirty two thousand nine hundred

(4)

CC/62/2021

twenty four) only to the complainant  within 30 days  from the date of passing  the final order  failing which the entire award money shall carry an interest  at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of final order  till the date of its realisation. All the OPs are jointly and severally liable for implementation of the award in favour of the complainant.

All interim Applications also stand disposed of.

D.A to note in the trial register.

The case is accordingly disposed of.

Let a copy of this final order be supplied to both the parties at free of costs.

Dictated & corrected by me

 ............................................

                PRESIDENT

(Shri   HARADHAN MUKHOPADHYAY,)                                      ................ ..........................................

                                                                                                                          PRESIDENT

                                                                                           (Shri   HARADHAN MUKHOPADHYAY,)

I  concur,

 ........................................                                                 

          MEMBER                                                                

(NIROD  BARAN   ROY  CHOWDHURY)