By Sri. MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
1. The case of the complainant is that his wife is the registered owner of KL10 U 3944 Autorickshaw and for the renewal of the R.C the complainant approached the opposite party on 13/12/2019. The opposite party received the challan and directed him to approach after 4 days. On that day the concerned employee said to him that the challan is not accepting there and directed to pay at Akshaya Centre. While the complainant approached Akshaya center it was told that the software has been changed and so challan can be remitted at opposite party office. When he approached the concerned employee of the opposite party, it was told that if the joint RTO permits to receive challan it will be accepted. Then the complainant approached joint RTO and stated to him the above fact and also said that the end of December 2019 is the last time for the renewal of registration certificate. At that time the opposite party was talking over mobile phone about medical lab report with somebody. The complainant was waiting in front of the joint RTO during that period. The complainant told the fact to the opposite party after completing telephone conversation but he asked the complainant to go away from his front. Thereafter complainant approached opposite party after two days and at that time he was asked to remit fine of Rs. 3,000/- (Three thousand rupees only) along with challan. The complainant is aggrieved due to the deficiency in service and thereby caused to pay fine and also resulted in expiry of validity period of registration certificate. Complainant alleges that any person approaches the opposite party in the absence of agents faces this short of bitter experiences. The complainant is not able to utilize the vehicle for the last 7 months due to non-renewal of registration certificate. The prayer of the complainant is to direct opposite party to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- and 10,000/- as mental agony and Rs. 10,000/- as cost of the proceedings to the complainant.
2. On admission of the complaint notice issued to the opposite parties and later the second opposite party deleted by the complainant from the proceedings. The first opposite party entered appearance and filed version. The opposite party filed version. The contention in the version is that the vehicle involved in the complaint is a 3-wheeler and the tax of the said vehicle was paid up to on 17/12/2019. Thereafter complainant has not taken any steps for the renewal of the registration certificate. He has not remitted required fee or produced incidental documents and even not subjected the vehicle for verification. It is the duty of the complainant to renew the registration and use the vehicle. The allegation that due to failure of software and the irresponsible attitude of the employees caused remitting fine to the complainant is baseless and opposed to the fact. The contention of the complainant is opposed to the fact liable to be dismissed. The opposite parties ready to renew the registration certificate subject to the remittance of fee, late fee, penalty etc. Hence the complaint is to be dismissed with cost of the opposite party.
3. The complainant filed affidavit and documents and they are marked as Ext. A1 to A3. Ext. A1 is the order of information officer in H 4/386/2020 dated 30-01-2020. Ext. A2 is a copy of complaint filed by the complainant before Joint RTO, Tirur. Ext. A3 is reply of Information Officer, Joint RTO, Tirur dated 31/12/2019. The opposite party Mr. Anwar Joint RTO, Tiur filed affidavit but no document is seen filed.
4. Heard the complainant and opposite party, perused the affidavit and documents. The point to be considered is whether there is deficiency in service and if so remedy and cost.
5. The case of the complainant is that vehicle of his wife KL 10 U 3944, autorikshaw registered up to 2019. The validity of registration ends by the end of 2019. Complainant approached opposite party for the renewal of registration certificate. But on the said day due to change in the software he could not remit the required fee and the concerned clerk who received the challan asked to come again after 4 days. While the complainant approached opposite party after 4 days it was told that the software yet not corrected and directed him to pay the challan outside at Akshaya center. While he approached Akshaya center they directed him to the opposite party office for the remittance of required fee. But on approaching concerned clerk of the opposite party office, he was told that the challan will be received only with prior approval of joint RTO. When the complaint approached joint RTO, he was engaged with conversation over telephone and after completing the conversation the complainant was driven away from opposite party. Thereafter the complainant filed a petition stating the fact before the Joint RTO but there was no result. At present the vehicle is idle and the complainant is liable to pay fine due to default of renewal of registration certificate in due time. The entire complications resulted due to irresponsible and deficient service of the opposite party and so the complainant prays for the compensation and cost.
6. The perusal of complaint and affidavit it can be seen that the complainant approached opposite party office for the remittance of required fee for the renewal of registration certificate. Complainant could not remit the same due to change in system. He approached then the concerned staff. But it can be seen that there was no responsible approach from the opposite party office. Complainant even alleges the opposite party itself was indifferent in providing service to the complainant. But the opposite party filed affidavit denying the allegations. He has stated that he is working in the office for the last three years and there is no as such allegations against him. He is properly serving the consumers and there are no incidents as alleged before. He denied entire allegations against the practice in the office. Complaint did not produce any evidence to substantiate his allegations. Opposite party contended that all the allegations raised by the complainant is to evade from payment of required fee for renewal. The opposite party has not denied the averment of the complainant that when the complainant approached the opposite party at the first and second occasions the software was under change. So, the Commission does not accept the contention of opposite party that the reason for filing this complaint was to evade the payment of fee. We find that the complainant approached the opposite party office to remit the required fee to renew his registration certificate but due to the deficient service from the part of opposite party he could not renew his registration certificate.
7. The complainant submitted that he could not remit the fee for renewal of the registration certificate and due to that reason, the vehicle was idle and he suffered inconveniences also. We find reason to accept that contention of the complainant. But the claim amount as compensation is without any basis. Complainant pray for 50,000/-
rupees as compensation, Rs.10,000/- for mental agony and inconvenience and 10,000/- as cost of the proceedings. Considering the entire aspect in the matter we allow the complaint as follows:-
8. The opposite party is directed to pay rupees 5,000/- (Five thousand rupees only) as compensation for deficiency in service and rupees 3,000/- (Three thousand rupees only) towards the hardships and inconvenience caused to the complainant due to the deficient service of opposite party and also cost of rupees 2,000/- (Two thousand rupees only) towards the proceedings.
The opposite party shall comply this order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant will be entitled for interest at the rate of 12% per annum for the above entire amount from the date of order till realization.
Dated this 17th day of December, 2021.
