Forum asks Dynamic Motors to compensate car owner
- Navy officer dies on board INS Kolkata off Mumbai
- Subrata Roy to remain in Tihar, Supreme Court calls Sahara's proposal "dishonourable"
- I'm not a terrorist, Modi should have met me: Arvind Kejriwal
- Modi's next round of Chai pe charcha doesn't have police permission yet
- SC issues notice to Centre on Kiran Reddy's PIL against creation of Telangana
The District Consumer Redressal Forum ordered Dynamic Motors of Industrial Area, Chandigarh to pay Rs 2,00,000 as compensation and Rs 20,000 as fine for litigation cost for selling a 2009 model of Chevrolet Aveo as a 2011 one, to a Kharar resident.
Kulwant Bhardwaj had bought the car from a dealer in February, 2011 and the car was delivered by General Motors India Pvt. Ltd, Gujarat with a sale certificate from Dynamic Motors mentioning the engine number, chasis number, purchase date and year of manufacture. After using the car for 10 months, Bhardwaj wanted to exchange his car when he learnt about an offer. He was shocked when an official told him that his vehicle was a 2009 model. When Dynamic Motors ignored his complaints saying that were only the dealer, he moved the Forum seeking return of the purchase amount of Rs 6,15,006 and a compensation of Rs 2 lakh.
General Motors then cleared that Dynamic Motors was not an agency of the company but was a dealer of Chevrolet Sales India Pvt. Ltd. They argued that they only issued a form about the chasis number of the vehicle which indicated the year of manufacture as December, 2009 and the sales certificate with February 2011 manufacture date was issued by Dynamic Motors. Dynamic Motors said that the complainant was aware about the vehicle's manufacture date of 2009 and had awailed a discount of Rs 40,000 for the same. It also said that the mentioned year of manufactureon the sale certificate was a typograpgical error.
The Forum found that the chassis form issued by Genreal Motors bore February 2011 and not December 2009 as the year of manufacture according to the District Transport Office, Mohali. The forum also found that no documents supplied to complainant by Dynamic Motors indicated the month and year of manufacture as December 2009. The car bearing registration file of the vehicle with the Disrtict Transport Office and the cover note issued by New India Assurance Company indicated the same. No evidence of the aforesaid Rs 40,000 discount was brought into the notice of the forum which also did not accept typographical as an excuse.