DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOZHIKODE
PRESENT : Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN, M.Com, LLB : PRESIDENT
Smt. PRIYA.S, BAL, LLB, MBA (HRM) : MEMBER
Sri.V. BALAKRISHNAN, M Tech, MBA, LL.B, FIE: MEMBER
Friday the 21st day of October 2022
C.C. 194/2022
Complainant
Nithin George,
S/o George Mathew,
Thevarkunnel House, Thiruvambady Post,
Calicut District, Kerala, India.
Pin - 673 603.
Opposite Party
The Manager,
Tata Motors Ltd.,
4th Floor, Ahura Centre,
82 Mahakali Caves Road,
MIDC, Andheri East,
Mumbai – 400093.
ORDER
By Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN – PRESIDENT
This is a complaint filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
- The case of the complainant, in brief, is as follows:
The complainant purchased a car from Tata Motors namely ‘Tata Punch Adventure Rhythm’, which was delivered on 14/04/2022. The car was booked on 06/01/2022 through Marina Motors (India) Private Limited, Kozhikode. Later on, the price of the car was increased with effect from 19/01/2022. However, Tata motors had promised price protection policy to its customers who booked on or before 18/01/2022. Hence he is a eligible customer for the price protection policy.
- During the first week of April 2022 the dealer intimated him that the vehicle had arrived and informed him that he was not eligible for price protection as Tata motors provided this benefit only for vehicles booked up to 31/03/2022. To get delivery of the vehicle, he paid the amount demanded by Tata motors. Though he contacted the opposite party several times no positive action was taken to redress his grievance. Tata motors intentionally delayed the delivery of the vehicle. The ex-showroom price of the vehicle was Rs. 6,74,000/- at the time of booking and was Rs. 6,87,900/- at the time of delivery of the vehicle. Thus he had suffered an additional amount of Rs. 13,900/- due to waiver of eligible price protection. His personal feelings and emotions were hurt due to the attitude of the opposite party and he is entitled to get compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-. Hence the complaint claiming compensation of Rs. 63,900/- (Rs.50,000/- + Rs.13,900/-).
- In spite of service of notice, the opposite party remained absent and was set ex-parte.
- The points that arise for determination in this compaint are :
- Whether there was any unfair trade practice or deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party, as alleged?
- Reliefs and costs.
- The complainant was examined as PW1. Exts A1 to A8 were marked.
- Heard.
- Point No.1 – The complainant has approached this Commission against the opposite party for denial of eligible price protection benefit while purchasing a new car Tata Punch Adventure Rhythm.
- In order to substantiate his case, the complainant got himself examined as PW1. PW1 has filed proof affidavit in terms of the averments in the complaint and in support of the claim. It is averred in the affidavit that he had booked the car on 06/01/2022. The Tata motors had promised price protection policy to its customers who booked the car on or before 18/01/2022. Later the price of the car was increased. When the car was delivered to him on 14/04/2022, the increased price was collected from him and the benefit of price protection was denied to him. Ext A1 is the copy of the press release which provides that no impact on the cars booked on or before 18/01/2022. The above document lends support to the case of the complainant.
- The evidence of PW1 stands unchallenged. The opposite party has not turned up to file version. The opposite party has not produced any evidence to disprove the averments in the complaint or to rebut the veracity of the documents produced and marked by the complainant. The complainant’s case stands proved through the testimony of PW1 and Exts A1 to A8. Denying the eligible price protection benefit to the complainant amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service. The complainant is entitled to get refund of Rs. 13,900/- being the additional amount he had to spend due to the waiver of the eligible price protection offered by the opposite party. Apart from this, he is entitled to get Rs. 5000/- as compensation for the mental agony and hardship suffered.
- Point No.2 : In the light of the finding on the above point, the complaint is disposed of as follows:
- CC 194/2022 is allowed in part.
- The opposite party is hereby directed to pay an amount of Rs. 13,900/- (Rupees thirteen thousand nine hundred only) to the complainant.
- The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as compensation to the complainant for the mental agony and hardship suffered.
- The payment as aforestated shall be made within 30 days of the receipt of copy of this order, failing which, the amount of Rs.13,900/- shall carry an interest of 6% p.a from the date of this order till actual payment.
- No order as to costs.
Pronounced in open Commission on this the 21nd day of October2022.
Date of Filing: 04/08/2022
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
Sd/-
MEMBER
Sd/-
MEMBER
APPENDIX
Exhibits for the Complainant :
Ext. A1 – Copy of the Press Release from Tata Motors dated 18/01/2022.
Ext. A2 – Copy of the communication with Tata Motors through Email regarding the
issue.
Ext. A3 – Copy of the Advance Booking Receipt from Dealer.
Ext. A4 – Screenshot of Order made from Tata Motor’s Software provided by the
dealer.
Ext. A5 – Ledger Summary from Dealer showing amount paid.
Ext. A6 – Proforma Invoice for order made on 06/01/2022.
Ext. A7 – Copy of the Preliminary information sheet dated 06/01/2022 provided by
the dealer.
Ext. A8 – Tax invoice copy dated– 12/04/2022.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party
Nil.
Witnesses for the Complainant
PW1 – Nithin George (Complainant)
Witnesses for the opposite parties
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
Sd/-
MEMBER
Sd/-
MEMBER
Forwarded /By Order
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
