Heard learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondent.
2. This appeal is filed U/S-41 of erstwhile Consumer Protection Act,2019(herein-after called the Act). Hereinafter, the parties to this appeal shall be referred to with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum.
3. The case of the complainant, in brief is that the complainant had purchased a second hand car bearing Regd.No.OR-17B-2101 from the OP-Finance Company on 25.02.2008 on payment of Rs.70,000/- who assured for transfer of the vehicle but did not do so till 2014 when the complainant came to know that although the vehicle was sold to him but it was registered in favour of Ramesh Kumar Agrawal. It is alleged inter-alia that when there is vehicle stands in the name of two persons, the complainant could not get the vehicle transferred to his name and the OP did not facilitate so. Since, the Op did not transfer the vehicle to the complainant, finding no other way, the complaint was filed.
4. The OP filed written version stating that the complaint is not maintainable because the complaint has been filed after eight years from the date of sale i.e. 25.022008. He also averred that the complainant is not a consumer under the OP, they have only financed the vehicle and complainant is not entitled to any relief. Therefore, the OP has no deficiency in service on their part.
5. After hearing both the parties, learned District Forum passed the following order:-
Xxxx xxxx xxxx
“We, accordingly, allowed the complaint. We direct the OP to get the vehicle transferred in the name of the complainant and to provide corrected R.C. Book of the vehicle to the complainant within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the Op shall refund the sale price of Rs/70,000/-(Rupees seventy thousand) and to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) towards compensation and to pay Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand) as costs to the complainant and to take back the vehicle from the complainant.”
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that learned District Forum has failed to appreciate the materials on record. According to him, the vehicle although stands in the name of Pravash Pradhan but name of Ramesh Agrawal has created confusion with the learned District Forum. He further submitted that the impugned order is also wrong because the OP was directed alternatively to refund sale price of Rs.70,000/- and the compensation with cost. But learned District Forum did not allow return of the vehicle to the OP because the OP if all pay back the sale price he ought to have got back the vehicle. So, he submitted to set-aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal.
7. Considered the submission of learned counsel for the appellant, perused the DFR and impugned order.
8. It is admitted fact that the Op has sold the vehicle to the complainant but the vehicle stands in the name of the Pravash Pradhan. The complainant by settled law is to bound to prove the complaint case and deficiency in service on the part of the OP. When the OP sold the 2nd hand vehicle to the complainant for Rs.70,000/- he should have transferred the registration certificate to the name of the complainant but has not done so. Learned counsel for the appellant admitted that there is registration of the vehicle recorded in favour of owner, whether it is Pravash Pradhan or Ramesh Agrawal. Such discrepancy as noted and the selling of the vehicle without any registration certificate are deficiency in service on the part of the OP. The finding of the learned District Forum is confirmed.
9. The only plea taken by the learned counsel for the appellant that they are ready to pay back Rs.70,000/- alongwith compensation and cost as per decision but the vehicle should be returned. On going through the operative portion of the order it appears that alternative order should be complied only on return of the concerned vehicle as it is cost in lieu of of return of the vehicle. Therefore, we modified the impugned order by directing the OP to transfer the vehicle to the complainant and provide correct Registration Certificate, failing which they will pay Rs.70,000/- on receipt of the vehicle from complainant.
Rest of the impugned order will remain unaltered.
Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the confonet or webtsite of this Commission to treat same as copy of order received from this Commission.
DFR be sent back forthwith.
