ASHOK RAMNIKLAL TOLAT Vs. GALLOPS MOTOR PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHAT should be the just and reasonable compensation to a consumer who has been wronged and had suffered due to the unfair trade practice perpetrated by the manufacturer/trader of goods like a motor car"? is the important question which needs to be considered in the present case.

(2.) MR . Ashok Ramniklal Tolat the petitioner in R.P. No. 3349 of 2006 and respondent No. 1 in R.P. No. 2858/2008 (to be referred as 'complainant' for the facility of reference), an elderly person in his late 70' shaving a passion for driving and a life long dream to visit Leh Ladakh, Jammu and Kashmir and Nepal with his wife by driving a motor car, was on a look out for acquiring a motor car which could fulfil his said dream. Accordingly, he surfed internet and on going through the website of M/s. General Motors India Private Limited, having its registered office at Chandrapura Industrial Estate, District Panchmahals, Gujrat (to be referred as O.P. No.1) at www chevrolat co.in and http //64 240.129.755/chevy/aboutforester htm., the complainant and his wife read that opposite party No. 1 had stated" introducing a world without borders, an SUV to end all SUVs. That's the new Chevrolet Forester. With the Power of 120 horses under its borne unique All -Wheels (AWD), it literally puts the four corners of the earth within your easy each. It won't just get you there. But get you there is unmatched comfort and luxury by -road, off -road or no -road. Believing O.P. No.l's claim of Chevrolet Forester AWD model Sports Utility Vehicle, complainant visited the showroom of O.P. No. 1 and its agents Infinity Drive P. Ltd. O.P. No. 2 and there he met Sh. Malav Ajitbhai Mehta and Smt. Jayshreeben Mehta of O.P. No.2, who handed over "GM" brochure and a book titled "for a special journey called life". They assured the complainant that O.P. No. 1's Chevrolet Forester AWD model Sports Utility Vehicle (to be referred as the 'motor vehicle') is well equipped to realize their dreams to visit Leh -Ladakh, Jammu and Kashmir, Kathmandu by road, off -road and no -road. He was also given brochure and assurance in writing that the vehicle in question is an S UV to end all SUVs. and....it will put the four corners of the earth within your reach and....it won't just get you there every time. But get you're there in unmatched comfort, by road, off -road or no road. The complainant was also shown visual presentation of the said motor vehicle and also given copy of VCD in which it was represented that vehicle in question was fit to be driven on road, off -road and dirt road. Going by the said literature and the assurance given by the O.Ps. the petitioner purchased the above named vehicle on 1.5.2004 at a price of Rs. 14 lakh. The petitioner also got accessories worth Rs. 1,91,295 installed in the said vehicle, which was got insured and registered with the transport authorities of the State and assigned registration number GJ -I -HF -8067.

(3.) AFTER the purchase of the aforesaid vehicle, the complainant faced great difficulties inasmuch as he found the vehicle to be not fit for off -road, no road and dirt road driving and so he approached O.P. No. 2, who in turn directed him to approach O.P. No. 3, the new agent/dealer of O.P. No. 1 for the said type of vehicle. Complainant accordingly approached O.P.No.3, who informed the complainant to refer the owner's manual in which at pages 8 -6 column 1 and 3, it was said 'off -road driving.....But please keep in mind that AWD Chevrolet is a passenger car and is neither a conventional off -road vehicle nor an all terrian vehicle.....If the driving through water such as when crossing shallow streams, first check the depth of the water and the water stream bed for firmness and ensure that the bed of streamis flat.... the water should be shallow enough that it does not reach under carriage." According to the complainant, the sattement made in the owner's manual were contrary to the assurance given by the opposite parties in their brochure, internet information and book titled 'for a special journey called life'. The complainant realized that the vehicle sold to him was not a SUV but was a passenger car which was not fit for off -road, dirt road and no road driving and, therefore, he could not drive it to Leh -Ladakh, Jammu and Kashmir and Kathmandu. According to the complainant, by such misrepresentation about the description of the vehicle and the tall claims about its performance, the O.Ps. had adopted and practised unfair trade practice within the meaning of Section 2(1)(r) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (to be referred as the 'Act'). Accordingly, after serving legal notice on the O.Ps. the petitioner filed complaint before the District Forum, Ahmedabad claiming the following reliefs: