Padam Motors fined Rs 1.5 lakh for selling old car model as new
For selling a car of old model despite having received money for new model, the district consumer disputes redressal forum, Chandigarh, directed a city-based vehicle dealer to pay Rs1.5 lakh as compensation to a customer to whom the vehicle was sold by “misrepresentation about the year of manufacturing of the car.”chandigarh Updated: Oct 29, 2014 14:09 IST
For selling a car of old model despite having received money for new model, the district consumer disputes redressal forum, Chandigarh, directed a city-based vehicle dealer to pay Rs1.5 lakh as compensation to a customer to whom the vehicle was sold by “misrepresentation about the year of manufacturing of the car.”
Disposing of the complaint filed by Jatinder Kumar, a resident of Sector 52, the forum also directed Padam Motors private limited, Phase 1, Industrial Area, to pay RS 11,000 as cost of litigation.
Kumar said he purchased a Chevrolet Sail on March 15, 2013, after paying Rs 5.99 lakh for a 2013 model. He alleged that taking advantage of the trust reposed on them, the dealer delivered the car of November 2012 model rather than a 2013 model car whose delivery he was promised.
The matter came to Kumar’s notice when he received a copy of the registration certificate wherein the year of manufacturing was mentioned as 2012 instead of 2013.He approached the dealer who admitted the mistake and assured that he would be suitably compensated, but no action was taken despite several visits.
Denying the allegations, Padam Motors submitted that Kumar was duly informed prior to the sale that the car was November 2012 make and after due discount it was offered to him. The complainant availed the discount and did not raise any objection. They added that all sale-related documents of the car also bear the date of manufacturing to be November 2012.
Finding no weight in the arguments of the dealer, the forum presided over by PL Ahuja on October 24 held, “The sale documents nowhere show the manufacturing date of the said car to be November 2012. On the other hand, the copy of the insurance cover note shows manufacturing year of the said car as 2013. We are of the opinion that the evidence on record is a clear pointer to the fact that the dealer sold the car of November 2012 make to the complainant, representing it to be of 2013 make, which amounts to unfair trade practice on their part.”