SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

Mukesh Pravinchandra Shah - Appellant
Versus
Managing Director, Sipan Automobiles Ltd. and Ors. - Respondent
Decided On : 01/07/1993
Complaint No. 263 of 1992
Advocates Appeared :
Mr. V.C. Parikh

Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 2(1)(r) r/w Monopolies Restrictive and Trade Practices Act 1969 - Sections 2(1)(v) 36A(i)(ii)(viii) - Complaint about unfair trade practice - Complainant booked the car advertised in the newspaper cost of which was stated to be Rs. 90,000/- Company did not fulfill the promise to deliver the car - Instead stated that - the cost of car is Rs. 1,95,000/- - When requested for the cancellation of booking and refund of deposit amount demanded original documents - After received the original documents did not reply the deposit amount Whether the company is following unfair trade practice? (Yes).

       Held:- We therefore, feel that the company which manufactures the cars advertise in the newspapers with no intention to deliver the same at the price fixed by them and there by collects deposits, do not give proper reply to the letters, do not appear before the Commission so that other persons can cross-examine and extract the facts and figures, should be seriously dealt with - None of the contentions raised by the company has any substance. We are, therefore, of the opinion that complainant has proved beyond doubt that the company is following unfair trade practice with the intention to collect money and was not even ready to return me deposit. We are also satisfied that the complainant has suffered damages on account of non-delivery of the car and even if he purchases new car from the market he will be liable to pay heavy price. (Para 12)

       Result: Complaint allowed.

       IMPORTANT POINT

       Collecting deposit by the manufacturers of car, after having advertised in the newspapers, with no intention to deliver the same at the price advertised by them and. not giving proper reply to the letters of the complaint to refund the advance money amounts to an unfair trade practice.

ORDER(ORAL)

S.A. Shah, President The opposite party viz. M/s. Sipani Automobiles Limited(hereinafter referred to as the Company) are the manufacturers of diesel and petrol car named as Montanna.

2. That reading the advertisement in the local newspapers, the complainant contacted the dealers M/s. Vinipsan Agencies at Ahmedabad to get the information about Montanna Diesel Car to be manufactured by the Company at Bangalore. He was given the literature and application form for booking. The complainant was interested in the diesel car which was advertised to give an average of 29 kms. and the expected cost per kilometer which was advertised was 0.14 paise whereas the cost of the car was Rs. 90,000/- which was to be delivered at Ahmedabad through the dealers.

3. Being tempted by such specifications and offer the complainant booked the car with the dealer and deposited Rs. 10,000/- by cheque dated 14.3.1989 in the DCO Bank, Ahmedabad in the account of M/s. Sal Car on 14:3.1989. Due acknowledgement was received from DCO Bank which has been produced by the complainant

4. Thereafter the complainant received the allotment intimation of Montanna car, the allotment number being 00 1 M and priority No. 00161. The allotment intimation is also produced with the complaint Thereafter he received two letters wherein it was promised that the delivery of the car will be started in the 1st week of October 1989. That inspite of this clear promise, again the complainant received one letter dated March 10, 1990 that some cars have been delivered in Bombay and the Company will deliver the car between April and June 90 to the complainant.

5. Instead of getting the car, the complainant received a circular regarding new model Montana Diesel Car showing the price at Rs. 1,95,000/-(Exh-5). Again, the complainant received a letter dated 18.3.1991(Exh-6) in which the Company stated that the cost of the Diesel car is Rs. 1,76,000/- and offered to transfer the booking to another car - Sipani D-I for which the Company demanded Rs. 9,000/- as transfer fees.

6. The complainant being tired with the Company for this delaying tactics and since two years have passed, wrote a letter by Registered Post A.D. to cancel the booking and return the amount. Ultimately on 31.7.1991 he received a letter from the Company asking him to send the original documents for cancellation of booking. The complainant sent the original documents vide his letter dated 31.8.1991. Instead of sending the deposit amount, the Company sent a reply dated 11.9.1991 wherein the cancellation was accepted and promised to send the full refund within 90 days. However no refund was received. The complainant waited for some more time and no refund having been received, has filed this complaint and has claimed damages of Rs. 75,000/- for failure to deliver the vehicle and Rs. 10,000/- the deposit paid and a further compensation of Rs. 25,000/- for mental suffering and agony and cost of Rs. 2,000/- for filing the complaint. The total amount so claimed comes to Rs. 1,12,000/-.

7. Mr. Parikh, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the complainant submits before us that this Company is following unfair trade practice by giving false advertisement to collect money from the gullible customers who rely upon such advertisement by paying high deposit. According to Mr. Parikh not a single customer has received the car from this Company though many person have booked this car in Gujarat. According to Mr. Parikh the Company is systematically following this tactics since 4/5 years and have collected huge amounts for booking the Sipani car. It never had any intention to supply the vehicle at that price. After having taken the deposit, the result is that the persons who intends to purchase the car books the car with the Company and restrains from booking with other Companies. The prices are rising day by day with the result if they intend to purchase another car from the market, they shall have to pay more than 75% being th

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top