State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Ramesh Kannan, vs R.P.Kumar, on 7 January, 2011
Daily Order
First Appeal No. A/10/194 (Arisen out of Order Dated 30/01/2010 in Case No. CC 233/02 of District Kollam) 1. Ramesh Kannan ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. R.P.Kumar ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HONARABLE MR. JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU PRESIDENT PRESENT: ORDER
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
APPEAL NO:194/2010
JUDGMENT DATED: 07-01-2011
PRESENT
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT
SHRI. S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR : MEMBER
Ramesh Kannan,
R/at T.C.16/2888, Babu Bhavan, : APPELLANT
Kumarapuram, Medical College.P.O,
Thiruvananthapuram.
(By Adv.Sri.Narayan.R)
Vs.
R.P.Kumar,
Managing Director,
M/s Shyam Motors )P)Ltd., : RESPONDENT
N.H.Byepass Road, Eanchakkal,
Kairali, Pettah.P.O,
Thiruvananthapuram-24.
(By Adv.Sri.K.C.Anilkumar)
JUDGMENT
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT Appellant is the complainant in OP.233/02 in the file of CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram. The CDRF has allowed the appeal in part directing to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation to the complainant in case he could not deliver the vehicle in a repaired condition.
2. The case of the complainant is that the Premier 118 NE car owned by him met with an accident and the same was entrusted to the opposite party for repairs. According to him he also paid a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards the repair cost. Subsequently the vehicle was not returned.
3. It is the case of the opposite party that a further sum of Rs.45,000/- was required for effecting repairs. The vehicle had sustained extensive damages. It is the case that on payment of the balance amount the repairs can be done.
4. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of PW1, DW1, Exts.P1 to P11 and D1.
5. It is seen from the proceedings of the Forum that on application of the opposite party the commissioner visited the workshop, but the vehicle was not available. The counsel for the respondent/opposite party has contended that the workshop stopped functioning and thereafter the vehicle etc was dumped in the compound of the building owner and subsequently the corporation authorities removed the items including the car as debris, as a road was constructed through the place where the vehicle etc was dumped. We find that the above case is not mentioned in the proceedings before the Forum. Evidently such a case has been put forward for the first time. The order of the Forum is dated:30/1/2010. In the circumstances we find that opposite party is liable to pay the then value of the car. The vehicle was of 1982 model. We find that it would be reasonable to order to pay Rs.1.lakh to the complainant towards the value of the car etc. The amount is to be paid within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which he is liable to pay interest at 18% from the date of this order ie, 7/1/2011.
Office will forward the LCR along with the copy of this order to the Forum.
JUSTICE K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR: MEMBER VL.
[HONARABLE MR. JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU] PRESIDENT