DADA MOTORS LTD Vs. SURESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is a delay of 23 days in filing this revision petition. Heard Mr. S.R. Bansal, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Delay is condoned and the revision petition is taken up for consideration.

(2.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner who was OP No.2 before the District Forum. The respondent herein is the complainant. OP No.1 is Firozepur Branch/office of the petitioner company but it has not been made party by the petitioner either while filing its appeal before the State Commission or in the present revision petition.

(3.) The facts of this case, according to the respondent, may be briefly stated as follows. The respondent had approached OP No.1 for the purchase of a new Tata Indigo diesel car of 2005 model on 15.1.2005. The car was not in stock of OP No.1 at Ferozepur. However, after receiving Rs.60,000/- in cash from the respondent, OP-1 assured the respondent to receive the delivery of the aforesaid car from the petitioner. Respondent obtained a loan from Bank of Punjab, Ferozepur and purchased the car for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-. Draft of that amount was handed over to the petitioner and after receiving the full amount, a Tata Indigo Diesel LS Euro-II car bearing Chasis no.6011144AUZP02899 and Engine no.4751DT121AUZP01602 was delivered to the respondent on 15.1.2005 by the petitioner and Invoice no.1579 with form no.22 was also issued by the petitioner in which the month and year of manufacture of the aforesaid car was mentioned as January 2005. Respondent was also offered by the petitioner a new car of 2004 model on discount but the respondent did not agree to this offer because he wanted to purchase a car of 2005 model only. Respondent came to know from the registration certificate that the year of the manufacture of the car in dispute was 2004 and not 2005. Feeling deceived by this act on the part of the petitioner, he filed a complaint with the District Forum for a direction to the petitioner to replace the car by a model of 2005 and also prayed for refund of insurance charges, registration charges as well as the expenses which he had spent for the delivery of the car from Ludhiana. It was prayed that the appellant may also be directed to pay compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- as mental harassment, Rs.5,500/- as counsel fee and Rs.1,000/- as litigation expenses to the respondent.