Ramkrishan Upadhyay

Tribune news service

Chandigarh, June 3

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, has upheld the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum’s order against auto dealer Krishna Auto Sales, Industrial Area, saying that the revision petition filed by the latter holds “no merit”.

The auto dealer had challenged the District Consumer Forum’s order dated September 10, 2020 in which the dealer had been told to release the vehicle against a payment of Rs 25,000 for the repair of the vehicle subject to the outcome of the complaint.

In her complaint to the form, city resident Poonam Sharma had alleged that despite making a payment of Rs 30,000 her car Skoda Rapid was still lying with the auto dealer for repairs. And now they are asking for money to repair the vehicle, she added.

Sharma said she took the vehicle for repair on December 28, 2019 and since then it had been lying with the dealer.

Counsel for the auto dealer submitted that the district forum while passing the impugned order failed to take into account an annexure with the complaint, in which the auto dealer had written the technical advice.

He alleged that the complainant was not ready to permit the dealer to repair the EGR cooler and as such, the problem of white smoke could not be rectified by replacing the spare parts mentioned at serial No. 1 to 6.

He claimed that the representative of the complainant refused to take the delivery of the vehicle and filed a consumer complaint before the forum.

The counsel further submitted that the defects in the car occurred due to irregular service. He further submitted that the vehicle was six years old.

On the other hand, the complainant said that when she visited the auto dealer in compliance with the order of the forum, the dealer refused to accept the amount of Rs 25,000 and deliver the vehicle.

She said the dealer rather demanded Rs 1,71,000 which constrained her to file an execution application before the district forum.

The application is pending for adjudication.

The complainant alleged that the documents submitted by the dealer were fabricated as they did not bore her signature.

After examining the records, the commission refused to interfere in the order passed by the district forum and said: “The order is very much clear and self-explanatory.”

“It is the admitted fact that the complainant already made the payment of Rs 30,000 for repair of the vehicle but the vehicle is still lying with the dealer, and further for change of the spare parts, some more amount was required,” the commission observed.

“The district commission rightly directed to make the further payment of Rs 25,000 for repair of the vehicle subject to outcome of the complaint, meaning thereby, the issue of pending payment will be seen at the time of decision on the complaint.

“When the dealer refused to accept the same, rather demanded an amount of Rs 1,71,000 from the complainant, the consumer was constrained to file an application which is pending before the district forum for adjudication,” it said.

“So, we are of the view that the district forum rightly passed the order. As such we do not find any merit in the revision petition.” the commission added.

The commission further stated that the present revision petition had been dismissed and hence, the stay application filed by the revision petitioner stood “infructuous”.

The commission also directed both the parties to appear before the district forum on July 22.