Complainant Harpal Singh vide the present complaint U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter for short the Act) for issuance of the necessary directions to the opposite party to handover R.C. and Insurance Policy of vehicle/Activa Jupiter immediately. Opposite party be further directed to pay Rs.50,000/- on account of mental agony, physical harassment and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party alongwith Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he purchased a Two Wheeler make Jupiter Colour white bearing Engine No.BG4NF2098247 Chassis No.MD626BG48F3N87396 from opposite party through Canteen Stores Department on 25.1.2016. At the time of delivery of the vehicle, the opposite party charged price over and above cost on account of expenses for preparation of R.C. and premium towards Insurance. The opposite party also issued Temporary Certificate of Registration valid upto 24.2.2016. He has further pleaded that a period of more than 1 year 5 months has been elapsed but till today the opposite party has neither handed over Registration Certificate nor supplied Insurance Policy of the vehicle. He has next pleaded that the vehicle of the complainant also met with an accident and in the absence of insurance policy, he was constrained to make payment of Rs.6,000/- for getting the vehicle repaired. He is facing great difficulties in plying the vehicle for want of R.C. as various checking agencies are harassing him while plying the vehicle and even threatening to challan or impound the same. Therefore, he is not in a position to ply his vehicle for no fault on his part. The opposite party is liable to handover R.C. and Insurance policy of the abovesaid vehicle to him as he had paid huge money for this purpose at the time of purchasing the vehicle. Thus, there is clear cut deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party. Hence this complaint.
3. Opposite party appeared through its counsel and filed its written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable; the complainant has got no locus standi to file the present false and frivolous complaint; the complaint is bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder of the necessary parties as there is dispute regarding the preparation of Registration Certificate of the vehicle, so the District Transport Officer, Gurdaspur is the necessary party which is to be impleaded as party in the above titled complaint and the complaint of the complainant is totally false, frivolous and vexatious one . On merits, it was submitted that at the time of purchase of the vehicle in question by the complainant from the opposite party, the complainant himself got made Demand Draft from the Bank and made payment to the opposite party. The complainant is serving in Army and at the time of delivery of the vehicle in question to the complainant, it was asked to him to give them the amount of RC, but he has refused to do so. The complainant is a person having suspicious nature. He has neither got taken Accessory from the opposite party nor has got insured the said vehicle from the opposite party. Rather the complainant has got insured the vehicle in question from outside the Showroom of the opposite party. The complainant told the opposite party that his leave is of some days and he is going at his place of posting ,in his absence, the vehicle in question would remain lying idle, so he will make contact with the opposite party as and when reached to his house after the leave from the Unit and apply the Registration Certificate of the vehicle in question. Thereafter the complainant did not visit the opposite party’s office. The complainant approached the opposite party in the lst week of May 2017 for preparation of RC. The opposite party applied for the Registration Certificate of the vehicle in question but after passing about 7/8 days, the complainant visited the office of the opposite party and demanded Registration Certificate. The opposite party told the complainant that he will have to wait for the R.C. since the RC has to be prepared and supplied by the District Transport Office, but the complainant started raising hue and cry at the office of the opposite party and even used unparliamentarily language against the opposite party. All other averments made in complaint have been denied and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
4. Ld.counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW-1 alongwith copy of Temporary Certificate of Registration Ex.C-1and closed the evidence.
5. On the other hand, ld.counsel for the opposite party tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Ranjit Singh Prop. Of Bajwa Motors Ex.OP-1 and of Sh.Sarwan Kumar Manager Ex.OP-2 and copy of Provisional Registration Certificate Ex.OP-3 and closed the evidence.
6. Written arguments filed on behalf of complainant.
7. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of counsels for the parties; written arguments as well as oral arguments advanced by their respective counsels and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsels for the purposes of adjudication of the present complaint.
8. The case of the complainant is that he purchased a two-wheeler, make Jupiter,Colour white bearing Engine No.BG4NF2098247 Chassis No.MD626BG48F3N87396 from opposite party through Canteen Stores Department on 25.1.2016. At the time of delivery of the vehicle, the opposite party charged price over and above the cost on account of R.C. and premium towards Insurance. The opposite party also issued temporary certificate of Registration valid upto 24.2.2016. It is averred that the opposite party failed to issue R.C. as well as Insurance Policy of the vehicle till the filing of the complaint which amounted to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Whereas the plea taken by the opposite party is that the complainant never got the vehicle insured from the opposite party rather he got the vehicle insured from some other showroom. Regarding R.C., it is stated that the complainant approached the opposite party in last week of May 2017 for the preparation of R.C. and the opposite party applied for the same. After 7-8 days, the complainant approached the opposite party and demanded Registration Certificate. Opposite party told the complainant that he will have to wait for the R.C. since the R.C. has to be prepared by the D.T.O.
9. In the present case, though the complainant has alleged that he had paid the charges for R.C. as well as Insurance of the vehicle to the opposite party but has failed to produce on record any receipt of the same. So far as R.C. of the vehicle is concerned, opposite party has admitted in its written statement that the complainant approached the opposite party for preparation of R.C. in the month of May 2017 and the opposite party applied for the same. Failure to supply the R.C. of the vehicle to the complainant till the filing of the present complaint, amounted to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
10. As an upshot of the aforesaid discussion, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant with a direction to the opposite party to supply the R.C. of the vehicle to the complainant. Opposite party is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- as compensation for the harassment undergone by the complainant alongwith a sum of Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses. Order be complied within a period of 30 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of this order.
11. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned.
(Neelam Gupta)
President
Announced: (Jyotsna)
August 04, 2021 Member
*MK*
