M.P.TIWARI vs GENERAL MANAGER, FAIRDEAL MARWAR GARRAGE LIMITED

DISSATISFIED with the award of compensation and interest, the complainant has filed Appeal No. 100/96 against the order dated 3.1.1996 passed in Case No. 3/94 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bhopal (for short the ''District Forum'').

THE opposite party No. 1 aggrieved of the order has filed Appeal No. 108/96. The facts giving rise, the complainant''s case are that the complainant purchased a new Maruti Car from the opposite party No. 1, the authorised dealer of the manufacturer opposite party No. 2, on payment of the amount of Rs. 1,66,541.80 paise. The opposite party No. 1 also charged Rs. 6,793/- as transportation and insurance charges, both amounts were paid by the Bank Draft. The delivery of the car was made on 21.12.1992. On the expiry of the insurance i.e. on 19.11.1993 the complainant approached the Insurance Company for its renewal and to give deduction of no claim bonus'' from the premium but that was not given. The Insurance Company informed that the said vehicle before the delivery to the complainant met with an accident on 24.11.1992 of which insured owner was M/s. S.D. Agencies, Bhopal. Complainant then enquired and collected the material. The New India Assurance Company by letter dated 5.5.1994 gave the details and the policy of the said vehicle bearing Engine No. 776775 and Chassis No. 525042, which was delivered to the complainant as a new car by opposite party No. 1. On this, the complainant approached the authorised dealer and asked for replacement of the car by new one or to make the refund of the amount and to pay compensation and interest which was denied, hence, the complaint was filed. The manufacturer did not contest the complaint. The aurhorised dealer opposite party No. 1 contested the complaint. The District Forum after appreciation of evidence held that the complainant was delivered a second hand accidented car by the authorised dealer as a new car, which amounted to unfair trade practice as defined in Section 2(1)(r)(1)(iii) of the Act, therefore, allowed the complaint partly and ordered the opposite party No. 1 to pay interest w.e.f. 24.11.1992 till 14.12.1992 on Rs. 1.63,332/- for delayed delivery and Rs. 960/- and compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 520/- on account of no claim bonus and costs of the proceedings assessed at Rs. 1,000/- within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order.

Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and the fact that the complainant having fed up with the second hand car delivered to him because of the unfair trade practice committed by the opposite party No. 1 sold the car during pendency of the appeal, in the circumstances, the order for replacement of the car cannot be passed. However, it is a clear case of unfair trade practice by sale of second hand accidental car though minor as new one for which the insurer paid the amount to the original owner of the car. The complainant purchased the car on payment of the full price for new car, but was delivered an accidented second hand car by change of milometer by the opposite party No. 1 who rubed the name of the original owner and address by fluid in the service book and the owner''s manual and also by change of temporary registration number. The plight and mental state of such a purchaser can very well be imagined causing him harassment and mental agony. It always gave mental trouble to the complainant therefore/he sold the car in Rs. 1,25,000/- only and suffered loss.

IN the circumstances, a reasonable, just and fair compensation and loss suffered deserve to be awarded. Therefore, we direct the opposite party No. 1 to pay Rs. 25,000/- in all with interest thereon at the rate of 12% p.a. from 15.1.1996, the date of the order passed by the District Forum. The amount so ordered shall be paid by the opposite party No. 1 within a period of six weeks from today failing which the interest shall be payable at the rate of 15% p.a. In the result, the appeal filed by the complainant is allowed. The order of District Forum shall stand substituted as indicated hereinabove. Appeal filed by opposite party No. 1 shall stand dismissed. Opposite party No. 1 shall bear the costs quantified at Rs. 2,000/-. Appeal No. 100/96 allowed and Appeal No. 108/96 dismissed with costs.