Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mandi, H.P.
Complaint Case No.59/2009
Date of Institution 20-2-2009
Date of Decision 29-6-2009
Shri Sanjay Sharma son of Sh. Shesh Ram Sharma resident of H. No. 362/13 Sauli Khad Mandi Town, District Mandi, H.P.
…Complainant
V/S
Auto World ,Ltd used Car show room , Franchise through its Manager Shri Pawan Kumar R/0 Auto World Show room Gutkar, Tehsil Sadar, District Mandi, H.P.
For the complainant Sh. Sanjay Mandyal , Advocate
Opposite party Exparte
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
ORDER.
This order shall dispose of a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986( hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) instituted by the complainant against the opposite party. The case of the complainant is that the opposite party had sold one Tata Indica car No. DLSCU-5234 to the complainant in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- wherein a rebate of Rs,20,000/- was allowed to the complainant and the complainant after adjusting the rebate paid Rs.1,80,000/- in cash to the opposite party . The complainant alleged that the vehicle so provided was defective and the same could not be operated due to constant mechanical defects and as such he had returned the same to the opposite party and it accepted the mistake and gave him car No HR-01M-2382 in the sum of Rs.90,000/- with the assurance to change the tyres , sheets and stereo with brand new one and also to give the no objection certificate ,registration certificate and insurance with the new vehicle and also agreed to return the amount taken in excess i.e. Rs.90,000/-. The complainant further alleged that neither five tyres , stereo and sheets were provided nor Rs.90,000/- taken in excess were returned and even the no objection certificate, registration certificate , and insurance were not supplied. The complainant further alleged that the act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service because he could not ply the vehicle due to non transfer of registration certificate in his name . With these allegations the complaint had sought a direction to the opposite party to return Rs.90,000/- taken in excess with interest from 11-9-2007 and had also sought a direction to the opposite party to provide the no objection certificate of car No. HR-01M-2382 alongwith insurance, tyres, sheets , stereo and other accessories or in the alternative refund Rs.1,80,000/-. Apart from this a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- has also been claimed on account of loss of income and Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.1000/- as costs of litigations .
2 The opposite party has failed to contest the complaint and was proceeded against exparte.
3. We have heard the ld counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the entire record. The case of the complainant is that earlier a Tata Indica second hand car DLSCO-5234 was purchased by him from the opposite party in the sum of Rs.1,80,000/-. However, the car so supplied by the opposite party was suffering from mechanical defects and for this reason, aforesaid car was returned to the opposite party and another second hand car bearing No. HR-01M-2382 in the sum of Rs.90,000/- was given to him and he was also assured by the opposite party to change the tyres, sheets and stereo with brand new one and also to give no objection certificate and to return Rs.90,000/- taken in excess. However, there is no documentary evidence on record produced by the complainant to show that earlier he purchased second hand car bearing NO.DLSCU-5234 from the opposite party in the sum of Rs.1,80,000/- which was returned to the opposite party being defective and in place there of another second hand car No. HR-01M-2382 in the sum of Rs.90,000/- was purchased from the opposite party and a sum of Rs.90,000/- was to be refunded to the complainant . The complainant had only filed photocopies of four receipts issued by the opposite party i.e. receipt No.1215 dated 8-12-2007 in the sum of Rs.70,000/-, receipt No. 1203 dated 19-11-2007 in the sum of Rs.17,500/-, receipt No.1077 dated 11-9-2007 in the sum of Rs.5000/- and receipt No.1078 dated 20-9-2007 in the sum of Rs.60,000/-. However, nothing has been mentioned in the aforesaid receipts that these were issued by the opposite party to the complainant for consideration of the car No. DLSCU-5234 or for car No. HR-01M-2382. Moreover the total amount of above four receipts comes to Rs.1,52,500/- which belies the claim of the complainant that he had paid Rs.1,80,000/- for consideration of the car No.DLSCU-5234 .Furthermore the receipts pertain to the month of September 2007 , November2007 and December2007 whereas as per the case of the complainant himself , he purchased the car in question on 25-4-2008 Therefore on the basis of aforesaid receipts it cannot be said that the complainant had firstly purchased the car in the sum of Rs.1,80,000/- , and the same was returned and in place thereof the complainant had purchased car in the sum of Rs.90,000/-. No agreement to sell has been placed on record by the complainant which could have established the purchase of the cars in question. . Therefore in the absence of any documentary evidence, it cannot be said that the earlier the complainant had purchased car in the sum of Rs.1,80,000/- and the same was returned and in place thereof he purchased car in the sum of Rs.90,000/-. Hence ,no direction can be issued to the opposite party to refund Rs.90,000/- which has been allegedly paid in excess to the opposite party by the complainant. However, it has been established by the complainant that he had purchased second hand car bearing registration No. HR-01M-5234 from the opposite party and the opposite party had failed to provide him insurance policy and No objection certificate for effective transfer of the registration of the vehicle in the name of the complainant .As per the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, the vehicle cannot be transferred in the name of the complainant without issuance of no objection certificate by the competent authority especially in view of the fact that the vehicle was earlier registered out side the State of Himachal Pradesh. In our opinion, since the vehicle was purchased by the complainant from the opposite party , therefore, it is its duty to complete all the formalities for transferring the vehicle in question in the name of the complainant. In this situation , it would be in the interest of justice if we direct the opposite party to complete all the formalities in accordance with law so that the vehicle is registered in the name of the complainant . The complainant had failed to prove any evidence to the effect that the opposite party assured him to change the tyres , sheets and stereo of car No HR 01M-2382 and therefore no direction can be issued to the opposite party in this respect.
4 The complainant had claimed Rs.50,000 /- on account of mental torture , agony and inconvenience caused to him due to the act and conduct of the opposite party. As discussed above, the opposite party has been deficient in providing service to the complainant because the no objection certificate has not been handed over to him nor the vehicle has been transferred in his name till date. In these circumstances we feel that a sum of Rs.5,000/- would be just and reasonable compensation to be paid by the opposite party to the complainant on account of harassment suffered by him due to the illegal act of the opposite party.
5 In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party is directed to hand over the insurance policy and No objection certificate of the vehicle in question and to complete all the formalities in accordance with law so that the vehicle is registered in the name of the complainant , within a period of two months from the receipt of the copy of this order failing which to pay Rs.100/- per day as penalty from the date of receipt of copy of this order till the documents are handed over to the complainant and in addition to this the opposite party shall pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for harassment and Rs.2000/- as costs of litigation.
6 Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per Rules.
7 File, after due completion be consigned to the Record Room.
Announced (Sushil Kukreja) President
29-6-2009
DKM ( Lal Singh ) ( Alkananda ) Members