RAJ KAMAL MOTORS vs P.S.SUBRAMANIAM

THESE two appeals arise out of the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Vellore dated 19.5.93 in O.P. 106/92. The Opp. Parties are the appellants in A.P. 329/93 while the complainant is the appellant in A.P. 351/93. He appeared in person but is absent today.

THE complainant has purchased a Kinetic Honda from the first Opp. Party for Rs. 18,761/-. He has paid the same on 27.2.91 but the vehicle was delivered on 27.3.91. THE complainant claimed interest during this interregnum. It is his further case that the vehicle has been giving trouble from the very beginning and he spent Rs. 500/- for repairs for the first instance and another sum of Rs. 1,200/-in the second instance. He claimed refund of these amounts. He claimed compensation in the sum of Rs. 2,000/-for mental pain and agony and another sum of Rs. 200/- towards the phone calls, registered letters etc. THE Opp. Parties resisted the claim. THEy contended that as the complainant did not produce the ration card, delivery of the vehicle could not be effected in time and they are not therefore liable for the interest for the intervening period. THEy contended that the troubles given by the vehicle were very minor and whenever they were brought to their notice they were ractified. THEre was no deficiency in service. The District Forum found that the vehicle has given troubles and this fact has been admitted by the first Opp. Party and awarded compensation for mental pain and agony in the sum of Rs. 1,000/-. The claim for the expenses alleged to have been incurred by the complainant towards repairs in the sum of Rs. 500/- in the first instance and Rs. 1,200/- in the second instance was denied by the District Forum on the ground that there was no voucher to substantiate this claim. The further claim for interest between the dates 27.2.91 when he paid the price amount and on 27.3.91 when the vehicle was delivered was rightly rejected by the District Forum. The claim for Rs. 200/- as expenses incurred towards phone calls, registered letters was also rejected by the District Forum. Aggrieved by the order awarding compensation in the sum of Rs. 1000/- the Opp. Parties have preferred A.P. 329/93; against the disallowance of the other claims the complainant has filed A.P. 351/93.

We have gone through the records and judgment of the District Forum and we find no ground to interfere with the same either on behalf of the complainant or on behalf of the Opp. Parties.

IT is not seriously disputed that the vehicle has developed some troubles. In Exh. B2 the Opp. Party has admitted the starting trouble. In the circumstances the complainant who has purchased a new vehicle must have been much put to some mental pain and agony and the award of compensation in the sum of Rs. 1000/- is reasonable and does not call for any interference. The complainant has claimed interest on the price amount paid on 27.2.91 forthe period from 27.2.91 till 27.3.91 when the vehicle was delivered. According to the Opp. Parties the delay was due to the fact that the complainant did not produce the ration card for registration. This contention of the Opp. Party has been accepted by the District Forum and we cannot find any ground to interfere with the same.

AS regards the claim for repairing charges in the sum of Rs. 500/- for the first instance and Rs. 1,200/- in the second instance, the complainant has not produced any vouchers. The said claim has therefore been rightly rejected by the District Forum. Another sum of Rs. 200/- is claimed by the complainant towards phone calls, registered letters etc., which is also not substantiated by any document. The rejection of this claim by the District Forum is not liable to be challenged. In the result both these appeals fail and are dismissed, but without costs. Appeals dismissed.