Delhi

East Delhi

CC/392/2014

CHARAN SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

AUTO NEED - Opp.Party(s)

06 Apr 2017

ORDER

             DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

              CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092                                       

                                                                                                        Consumer complaint no.   392 / 2014                                                                                                                                                                                                         

                                                                                                        Date of Institution            22/04/2014

                                                                                                        Order reserved on             06/04/2017

                                                                                                        Date of Order                     10/04/2017               

In matter of

Mr Charan Singh, adult

S/o  Sh. POP Singh      

R/o- US 721B, Uttari School Block

Mandawali Fazalpur, Delhi  110092…………………………………..…………….Complainant                                                                    

                                                                           

                                                                              Vs

1-M/s Auto Needs Pvt Ltd.   

E 1/4, Pandav Nagar,  

Nr Mother Dairy, Delhi 110091

 

2-M/s ICICI Lumbard Motor insurance Co.

25 Barakhamba Road,

New Delhi 110001

 

3-RTO

Mayur Vihar Phase I

Delhi 110096……………………………….……………………….………………………….Opponents

 

Quorum …………………………………………..Sh Sukhdev Singh      President

                                                                   Dr P N Tiwari              Member

                                                                   Smt Harpreet Kaur    Member                                                                                                                     

                    

Order by Dr P N Tiwari  Member 

Brief  Facts of the case                                                                                                    

Complainant purchased two wheeler Hero Meastro Scooty vide registration no. DL7SBQ1758 on 26/10/2012 from OP1 having its office at B1/100 New Kondly Delhi after paying a sum of Rs 28,500/-and balance amount was paid through auto loan from M/s Shri Ram Union Finance and paid monthly installments of Rs 2500/- per month up to 07/11/2013.

The vehicle was duly insured by OP2 vide policy no. 3005/17494705-10378/000 having insured tenure from 26/20/2012 to 25/10/2013 with Engine no. JF32AACGK14234 and chassis no. MBLJF32ABCGK14223  was written in the policy.  

Complainant paid premium amount Rs 1358/ as marked CW1/1 and on the basis of these documents, OP1 got his RC made through local RTO office which was annexed here as Ex CW1/2. The date of registration with RTO was 19/11/2012.

The complainant stated that he received a call from original owner of the same registration no. which complainant had, alleged that caller had his Scotty’s chassis and engine number and the same was not in his registration certificate. Complainant immediately approached OP1/ the seller’s office from where he had purchased his scooty. The seller /OP1 gave receipt bearing no. 23842 and promised complainant to get the entries corrected from RTO office. Even after two months, complainant did not get the corrected RC as per his vehicle.  

Complainant also approached ICICI Lombard Insurance Co./OP2 office for renewal of his vehicle insurance. He found that chasis no MBL J F 32ABCGK14223 and engine no. JF32AACGK14234 were changed in his scooty as per his policy vide policy no. 3005/17/494705-10378/000 which was valid from 26/10/2012 to 25/19/2013 as marked CW1/2. The vehicle had IDV 43605/. He had paid insurance premium of Rs 1358/-on 26/10/2012, on the date of purchase of his scooty On the basis of this policy, he got RC prepared from OP3 as marked Ex CW1/3.  

The complainant informed to Police at Gazipur Police Station, Delhi on 19/01/2014 at 1.20 pm about cheating done by OP1. Thereafter, OP1 assured complainant to get the details changed for chasis no. MBLUF32ABCGK14223 and engine no. JF32AACGK 14234 to chasis no. MBLJF32ABDGK12500 and Engine no. JF32AACGK 12151 in RC of complainant’s vehicle through RTO/OP3.

The complainant stated that OP1 told that by getting changed details, he would become the 2^nd owner of the said vehicle. It was refused as complainant had purchased new vehicle after paying full payment to OP1. As the complainant had full apprehension for getting harassment from police as he had no valid details in his RC and was playing his vehicle for his livelihood. It was all due to the unfair trade practice and deficiency in the services of OP1 which led huge mental agony and physical harassment. So, he sent a legal notice to OP1 on 18/02/2014 for his deficiency in services and harassment caused to him and claimed Rs. one lacs for damages as marked as Ex CW1/4. When no reply was received from OP1, he filed this complaint for getting correct RC as per his vehicle details and Rs One lac for mental agony and harassment with Rs 11,000/- as litigation charges.  

Notice were served. All OPs filed their written statement and denied facts and allegations put  against them. OP1 stated that there was no deficiency on their part as the complainant had taken other vehicle/scooter from OP1 office which was registered in other customer’s name and simultaneously other customer had taken his scooty which happened due to the mistake of both the customers. OP1 had also stated that it was a minor human mistake and was ready to get exchanged his vehicle from other customer, but complainant was not ready for exchanged and if details were changed in the RC card, complainant would be a second owner. This offer was not acceptable to him, though as per present complaint, a minor mistake had occurred in documents which had been submitted RTO. OP1 also stated that the said scooty was registered in the name of present complainant and details could be rectified.

OP2 / ICICI motor vehicle Insurance Co. submitted that two policies were issued by them. Their entries in the policy documents were done on the basis of details forwarded by the seller / OP1 and accordingly premium was charged. So, the first policy was issued from 26/10/2012 to 25/10/2013 having policy no. 3005/17494705/10378/000 bearing engine no. JF32AACGK1434 and chassis no. MBLJF32BCGK14223 based on the criteria of sale letter sent by the seller. The IDV value was Rs 43605/-.

When complainant submitted a receipt containing sale details and hypothecation, OP2 after due verification of vehicle and documents, issued a fresh policy vide policy no. 3005/21213056/10378/000 from 02/12/2013 to 01/12/2014 for the said scooty/vehicle having registration no. DL7SBQ1758 for IDV of Rs 38320/-and issued terms and conditions of the policy which was on record.  Hence, it was submitted by OP2 that there was no deficiency in their services and whatsoever had happened was due to the error occurred due to OP1. So, OP2 may be deleted as necessary party in this complaint as per their application u/o 1, Rule 10 of CPC.

OP3 /RTO Mayur Vihar, Delhi submitted their written version through AR Sh. S K Pandit, UDC, stated that all the entries were done in the RC on the satisfaction of all the required documents submitted by the seller/OP1. The seller letter issued by OP1 had mentioned details of the said vehicle and on its detail, RC was issued. It was submitted that when an application was received from the complainant about wrong entries in his RC, proper verification was done on the basis of a receipt showing different engine and chassis no., vehicle was inspected and necessary correction was done in the RC record and thereafter a new RC was issued to the complainant / Sh Charan singh against vehicle no. DLSBQ 1758.     

Complainant filed his rejoinder with evidence on affidavit. Complainant in his evidence on oath reaffirmed on oath that OP1 had done fraud and intentionally cheated him by giving wrong details on second time also. He further stated that OP1 had entered wrong engine and chassis no. in documents and did not check the same and wrong details were entered in his RC which led him lot of apprehension of being harassed by police if he his RC and other documents were get checked.

OP1 filed their evidence through Mr Shish Pal Ramola, Manager at OP1 office, who stated on oath that it was due to the negligence of complainant who took another’s scooty instead of his own. OP1 tried to get the exchange the vehicle and also assured to complainant for getting RC corrected free of cost OP1 also admitted that due to minor mistake from their staff may be forgiven and complainant would get his corrected RC and also policy documents. It was also admitted that RTO enter details only after getting required documents from seller/OP1.

OP2 also submitted their evidence on affidavit through Mr Vikas Goyal, Manager Legal, who stated on oath that the first policy was issued by them from 26/10/2012 to 25/10/2013 on the basis of details supplied by OP1 and thereafter, policy cover note was issued. When complainant approached for renewal of his old policy, he requested to change engine and chassis no. as per receipt issued by OP1. After due verification of documents, sale letter of OP1 and sscratching the numbers of engine and chassis of the said vehicle, required correction was done and new policy was issued vide policy no. 3005/21213056/10378/000 from 02/12/2013 to 01/12/2014 for scooty bearing registration no. DL7SBQ 1758 for IDV of Rs 38320/-whose copy was on record. Hence it was prayed to dismiss the complaint.  

OP3 also stated on oath by AR Sh. S K Pandit, UDC, that all the entries were done in the RC on the satisfaction of all required documents submitted by the seller/OP1. The letter issued by OP1 had mentioned details of the said vehicle and its detail, so RC was issued. It was also stated that when complainant approached OP3 for correction of details in his RC, all records were examined and it was found that due to some mistake from OP1 wrong details were entered. But after getting corrected entries submitted by OP1, new RC was issued in the name of complainant which was on record.       

Arguments were heard from all the parties and order was reserved.

After perusal of all the facts and evidences filed by the parties, it was evident that OP1 had done mistake by not giving correct details to RTO and also to OP2 due to which wrong policy was issued and wrong entries were made in RC. More so, complainant has not submitted any  purchase of scooty documents to be issued by OP1. It was also noted that OP1 has accepted his mistake stating that due to mistake of his staff, complainant had to face hardship. It is now clear that there is gross deficiency in service of OP1 due to which complainant had to undergo huge mental agony for not having valid vehicle documents (RC and Policy) for maximum period and also renewal of his policy got delayed for over two months. Though corrected RC copy was on record.  We could not find any deficiency in services of OP2 and OP3, so we do not put any liability on them. As far as OP1 is concerned, complainant has clearly proved deficiency in services and unfair trade practice u/s 2(1)(r)(1)c (x)  which states as “gives false or misleading facts disparaging the goods, services or trade of another person”. Hence we allow this complaint with the following order —

1. OP1 is directed to pay the compensation Rs 30,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the receiving of this order.
2. If order is not complied by OP1 in stipulated time, then complainant shall be entitled to recover the award with 9% from the date of filing of this complaint till realized.  
3. No other order to cost.    

The copy of the order be sent to the parties as per the rules and the file be consigned to Record Room.

 

(Dr) P N Tiwari Member                                                                              Mrs Harpreet Kaur Member 

                                                         Shri Sukhdev Singh – President