Filed On: 18.07.2013
Disposed On:06.07.2015
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, THIRUVALLUR
PRESENT . THIRU. S. PANDIAN, B.Sc., L.L.M : PRESIDENT
TMT. S. SUJATHA, B.SC., : MEMBER-I
THIRU. V. VENKATESAN, M.A.B.Ed., MBA. M.PHIL.B.L., : MEMBER-II
Monday, the Day of 6th July-2015
C.C.NO. 36/2013
E. Helan
W/o A.EdinBrough,
No.21/51 Kumaran Street,
Oragadam, Ambattur
Chennai 600 053. … Complainant
-Vs-
1. Concorde Motors (I) Ltd.,
Rep, by its
The Managing Director
The Chennai Head Office
No. 42, Velachery Road
Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.
(As per the order of CMP 8/2014, Dt. 8/7/2014
Op-1 is hereby deleted)
2. The Manager,
Concorde Motors,(I) Ltd.,
No. 79, 80,81,(SP) Ambuttur, I.D. Estate,
Ambuttur Chennai-600053. … Opposite party
Counsel For Complainant : M/s. C.K. Umashankar, Advocate
Counsel For Opposite Party : M/s. V. Annalakshmi, Advocate
This Complaint is coming upon before us finally on 26.6.2015 in the presence of M/s. C.K. Umashankar, Advocate on the side of the complainant and M/s. V. Annalakshmi, Advocate appeared on the side of the Opposite Party and upon hearing arguments on the side of the Complainant an perused the documents and evidence, this Forum delivered the following,
ORDER
PRONOUNCED BY THIRU. S. PANDIAN, PRESIDENT
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thiruvallur
This complaint is filed by the complainant U/S 12 of Consumer protection Act 1986, against the opposite party for seeking direct to return back the advance amount of Rs.5000/- and to pay a compensation for mental agony suffered, for a sum of Rs.10,000/- due to deficiency in service with cost of complaint.
The brief Facts of the Complaint are as follows:
1. The Complainant approached the Opposite Party in order to Purchase the TATA INDICA VISTA CAR and after discussion, she had booked the car, and also paid a sum of Rs.5000/- in and towards as advance. When she booked the above mentioned car from the opposite party, she had been taking strenuous efforts to secure the balance amount to be paid to the Opposite Party. However, all her efforts and attempts in securing the balance amount to pay the Opposite Party ended in vain. Immediately the complainant even after informed and appraised the opposite party about her inability to arrange the Balance amount and requested to return the advance amount paid by her to them. But the opposite party has not returned the advance amount till this date. Hence the complainant is constrained to cause a notice dated. 13.12.2012 to the opposite party through speed Registered post with Acknowledgement due. Even after the said notice sent the opposite party has not complied with the request of the said notice. Hence the complaint.
The averments of the Written version filed by the Opposite Party are as follows:
2. The Opposite Parties, denies all the allegations made in the complaint as false, baseless and incorrect except those allegations that are admitted herein. It is true that the complainant paid a sum of Rs.5000/- as advance and booked a TATS INDICA VISTA CAR on 27.10.2012. After two weeks, the Opposite Party sales consultant informed the complainant that the vehicle is ready and requested for further payment. The complainant said that she will pay the balance amount within two to three days and will take delivery of the vehicle. After that there was no response from the complainant and the opposite parties holding the particular vehicle till December 2012. In the first week of December 2012, the complainant came to the Opposite Party office & asked to cancel the booking. She was in a hurry, asked for the refund of her booking amount immediately. At that time, the opposite party’s Executive asked the complainant to produce the original receipt to proceed the cancellation and refund of the booking amount. She said that she came for some other work, on that way she approached the opposite parties and will bring the original receipt some other day. But till date she did not approache4d he opposite party’s for refund with the original receipt. By the best of imagination the opposite party are not able to make out what is the ulterior motive of the complainant to blow this non issue to such heights when the case is totally baseless. The complainant has claimed an exorbitant amount by way of mental agony, which goes to show that the complaint is an exercise on the part of the complainant to make unlawful gains and unjust enrichment at the expense of the Opposite Party. Infact, Opposite Party has taken pains to fulfill their responsibilities to extend the best service and there is no deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Party in doing the service to the complainant. The Complainant has not approached this Hon’ble Forum with clean hands. Hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
3. On the side of the complainant, proof affidavit filed for her evidence and Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 are marked. While so, the opposite party also filed proof affidavit and ExB1 is marked.
4. At this juncture, the point for determination before this forum is,
(1) Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party as alleged in the complaint?
(2)To what other relief the complainant is entitled to?
5. Written arguments submitted by both sides and the copy of the same is furnished to either side. In addition to that oral arguments also adduced on both sides.
6. Point No.1:- On careful perusal of the proof affidavit of the complainant, it is learnt that the complainant after having discussion with the opposite party and had booked the TATA INDICA VISTA CAR on 27.10.2011 and paid Rs.5000/- towards advance for the purchase of the car. The receipt of the advance booking is ExA1. Thereafter, the complainant in spite of taking all strenuous efforts, she could not secure the balance amount and immediately informed the opposite party through phone as well as in person and appraised the in ability of making the amount and requested to return the Advance amount. But the opposite party has not returned the advance till date and there by caused mental agony. Hence, the complainant was constrained to issue legal notice dated 13.12.2012 to the Opposite Party which is marked as Ex.A2 and the same was delivered to the opposite party and the letter of the post office to that effect is marked as Ex.A3.
7. While so, it is learnt from the proof affidavit of the opposite party, that in the first week of December 2012, the complainant came to the office of the opposite party and asked to cancel the booking and she was on hurry to refund the advance immediately and at that time, the executive of the opposite party asked the complainant to produce the original receipts to proceed further. The complainant told the opposite party that she will bring the original receipt some other day about now the conveniently suppressed the said fact. After that, she never approached the opposite party for best reason known to her and instead had chosen to file this complaint. It is further learnt that the opposite party communicated to the complainant through Ex.B1 that they are ready to refund and above phone calls, but the complainant did not approached the opposite party for refund with the original receipts. The opposite party has never neglected to serve the customers and very prompt in replying to the grievances of the customers and therefore there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.
8. At the outset, it is an admitted fact that the complainant had booked the TATA INDICA VISTA CAR with the opposite party’s showroom. Similarly, the inability of the complainant on making the balance amount to purchase the said car is also not disputed. The only allegation made by the complainant is that even after informed the above said fact to the opposite party he has not return the advance amount of Rs.5000/- till date. Whereas, the opposite party contented that they are ready to refund the advance amount on production of the original receipt but the complainant has not approached, instead, she has preferred this complaint for the reason best known to her and in order to prove Ex.B1 is marked. While so, the complainant argued that Ex.B1 is a created document and no such letter has been received by the complainant till date. In such being the position it is the duty of the opposite party to prove about the service of the ExB1, mode of service and process of sending. But, in fact no such document produced before this forum. Similarly, the opposite party has not marked any proof for phone calls to the complainant.
9. In such circumstances, this forum wants to enlighten that if the opposite party was ready to refund the advance, the complainant would have received the same on production of the original receipts (Ex.A4) which is very well available with her. At this juncture, it can be easily inferred that there was some tussle between the parties and the problem was aggravated to some extent.
10. From the foregoing among other facts and available evidence, it is an admitted fact that the advance amount of Rs. 5000/- not refunded to the complainant till date by the opposite party even after issue of Ex.A2 notice. As already concluded that Ex.B1 cannot be looked into it since the mode of service not proved properly. So, the complainant proved the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. Thus the point No.1 is answered accordingly.
11.POINT NO.2:- As per the findings of the point No. 1, the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed in the complaint and reasonable compensation. Thus the point No.2 is answered accordingly.
In the Result, this complaint is allowed in part. Accordingly, the Opposite Party is directed to return the Advance amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) with interest of 9% P.A from 27.10.2012 to the date of payment and pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) towards compensation and a cost of Rs.1000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only).
The above amount shall be payable within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which the said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% P.A. till the date of Payment.
Dictated directly by the president to the Steno-typist, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the president and pronounced by us in the open forum on this the 6th July – 2015.
Sd/-*** Sd/-*** Sd/-***
MEMBER-I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT
List of Complainant Documents:
Ex.A1. Dt. 27.10.2012 - Xerox Copy of receipt for Advance Payment made
by the complainant to purchasing the Car.
Ex.A2. Dt. 13.12.2012 - Xerox Copy of Notice with Postal receipt sent by
complainant to the Opposite Party
Ex.A3. Dt. 17.12.2012 - Xerox Copy of Postal Department intimating to the
complainant Article delivered to the addressee receipt.
List of Opposite Party Document:
Ex.A1. Dt. 19.12.2012 - Xerox Copy of Concorde Motors India Ltd., Cash
Paid Letter
Sd/-*** Sd/-*** Sd/-***
MEMBER – I MEMBER – II PRESIDENT
