By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President:
The complainant has purchased TVS Victor bike from 2nd respondent by taking loan from 1st respondent. The loan was arranged by the 2nd respondent and cheque was issued in the name of 2nd respondent. At the time of delivery of the vehicle the RC book and one spare key are not handed over to complainant. When it was asked the 3rd respondent told that the RC book and spare key will be returned on closure of loan. The complainant has closed the loan and approached 1st respondent for getting NOC, RC book and spare key. The 1st respondent given only NOC and wanted to come after 15 days for collecting RC book and spare key. On his visit the 1st respondent told that the RC book and spare key were collected by 2nd respondent for taking insurance claim. The 2nd respondent also did not deliver RC book and spare key to the complainant. During the loan period three insurance claims were obtained to the vehicle of complainant. The cheques were issued in the name of 2nd respondent. Usually the insurance company will be issued cheques only on perusal of RC book. Now the complainant is laid up due to an accident and the non-availability of RC book is causing difficulty to complainant. The acts of respondents are deficiency in service. Hence the complaint.
2. The counter averments of 1st respondent is to the effect that it is true that the complainant has purchased one TVS Victor bike by taking loan from this respondent. The complainant has also paid the entire loan amount. As per loan agreement there is no practice of keeping spare key and RC book with the bank. Both of them are not in the custody of this respondent. Hence dismiss.
3. The counter of 2nd respondent is that there is no consumer relationship between this respondent and complainant. It is true that this respondent is a dealer of TVS victor bike and this respondent is not arranged any loan to complainant. This respondent is not kept the RC book or spare key of complainant. It is incorrect and wrong that this respondent has taken the spare key and RC book for arranging insurance claim. There is no deficiency in service from this respondent. Hence dismiss.
4. The 3rd respondent remained exparte.
5. The points for consideration are that:
(1) Whether there was any deficiency in service from respondents?
(2) If so reliefs and costs.
6. The evidence consists of oral testimonies of PW1 and RW1, Exts. P1 and P2.
7. Points: The complaint is filed to get RC book and spare key from the respondents. It is the case that while taking delivery of vehicle from 2nd respondent the RC book and spare key were not given to complainant. It is stated that after closure of the loan the same will be returned. On closure of the loan the complainant demanded the same but were not delivered and the respondents-1 and 2 contended that they were not in possession of spare key and RC book.
8. The complainant is examined as PW1 and Exts. P1 and P2 documents were marked. It is his definite case that while taking delivery of the vehicle from 2nd respondent one of the keys is not given to him. It is also his case that he didn’t see the RC book. According to PW1 the copy of RC book was obtained from the 2nd respondent shop. So it is the case of complainant that the RC book and spare key are not obtained to him while taking delivery of the vehicle. But the respondents-1 and 2 are in the stand that they were not kept the key and RC book. According to 1st respondent, the 2nd respondent has taken the RC book and spare key for arranging insurance claim. At the same time the 2nd respondent denied this version and stated that they were not in possession of the RC book and spare key.
9. The 2nd respondent is examined as RW1 and it is his version that both the keys were given to complainant at the time of delivery of the vehicle. But he admitted that RC book was not given to complainant and it is the practice that at the time of delivery of the vehicle the RC book will not hand over. It is the version of RW1 that the RC book and spare key will be kept by the Bank. But during cross examination for complainant he deposed that at the time of delivery of the vehicle both of the keys were delivered to complainant. So it can be seen that he has no consistent case with regard to the transaction.
10. It is the case of complainant that at the time of delivery of the vehicle the original RC book and spare key are not delivered to him. The evidence adduced by 2nd respondent would lead to the correctness of the complainant’s case. Even if the 1st respondent stated that they are not in possession of RC book and spare key they did not adduce any evidence to prove the transactions. Without getting the original RC book and spare key the complainant cannot ply the vehicle. It is the situation that even after closure of the loan he is not in possession of the RC book. The respondents-1 and 2 are responsible for the same. They are blaming each other for the default committed by them.
11. In the result the complaint is allowed and the respondents-1 and 2 are directed to return the original RC book and spare key to complainant and pay compensation of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) each by both respondents-1 and 2 with costs Rs.300/- (Rupees three hundred) each within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 19th day of July 2012.
