DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ROPAR
Consumer Complaint No.72 of 2022
Date of institution: 16.05.2022
Date of Decision: 14.11.2022
Ajaib Singh son of Moti Singh, resident of Villagte Chalaki, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar
….Complainant
Versus
M/s CM Auto Sales Private Limited, Maruti Suzuki Aren, NH-21, Samrala Road, Morinda, District Rupnagar, through its proprietor.
……..Opposite Party
Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.
QUORUM: Sh. Ranjit Singh, President.
Mrs. Ranvir Kaur, Member
PRESENT: Sh. HS Kang, Advocate, for complainant
Sh. Pardeep Mittal, Advocate, for OP
ORDER
SH. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT
The present order of ours will dispose of the above complaint filed under Consumer Protection Act, by the complainant against the Opposite Party on the ground that the complainant had purchased motor car with provisional Registration No.PB-875183, Maruti Suzuki Alto VXI vide bill dated 24.11.2020 for a sum of Rs.3,10,491/- from the OP and the same was got financed from the State Bank of India, Branch Morinda, and accordingly, hypothecation of the same was to be mentioned in the registration certificate. At the time of purchase of the said vehicle, the entire original documents of the said vehicle as kept by the OP for registration of the said vehicle with motor vehicle authority. While the official of OP applied for original registration certificate with the Motor Vehicle Authority, the official of the OP wrongly and illegally mentioned and update name of the financer as Fedral Bank Limited, Morinda on the provision RC of the vehicle in question and on the basis of provisional RC the original RC was to be prepared by the motor vehicle authority. On the provisional RC of the vehicle in question the complainant could not notice the said mistake and negligence of the OP and insurance policy of the same. The OP had charged the entire amount from the complainant for registration of the said vehicle from the motor vehicle authority and they were supposed to hand over the original RC of the vehicle to the complainant within one month whereas the OP wrongly and illegally kept held up said original RC and delivered the same to the complainant after ten months and then the complainant noticed that the OP has wrongly and illegally got mentioned the financer of the said vehicle as Federal Bank Limited, Branch Morinda, instead of State Bank of India Branch Morinda. The complainant was supposed to hand over the original RC of the said vehicle to the financer i.e. State Bank of India Branch, Morinda within six months from the date of purchase of the said vehicle. The complainant on getting the original RC of the said vehicle from the OP after ten months noticed said mistake and negligence on the part of the OP about wrong mentioning of financer of the said vehicle and then approached the OP pointed out about their said mistake and the OP had again kept the original RC of the said vehicle with them. The financer of the vehicle in question of the complainant i.e. State Bank of India due to non submission of the original RC within six months has deducted as fine due to non submission of copy of RC financed by them the amount of Rs.2500/- per month and the same was increased to Rs.2950/- and the same would further increase and in this way the complainant has been caused loss of Rs.22,700/- and further loss of work, transportation etc. So far and he has been harassed mentally, physically and very badly financially. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs:-
- To pay Rs.50,000/- due to negligence on the part of the OP
- To pay Rs.50,000/- as damages on account of mental, physical and financial harassments caused to the complainant along with interest @ 12% per annum
- To pay Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. Upon notice, the O.P. 1 has filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that the complaint is not maintainable; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering OP; that answering OP has been unnecessarily dragged in this frivolous litigation; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering OP; that the complainant has concealed the material facts from this Commission. On merits, it is stated that the complainant has not directly purchased the vehicle in question from the answering OP and he has purchased the vehicle in question from Army Canteen, Jalandhar and delivery of the vehicle was also made through Army Canteen, Jalandhar. The registration certificate was prepared by the concerned Registering Authority, Morinda and not by the answering OP. The complainant has not impleaded Army Canteen, Jalandhar from whom he has purchased the vehicle and has not made the Registering Authority, Morinda as party who has done the alleged mistake by writing name of the financer as Federal Bank in place of State Bank of India. Therefore, the complainant is bad on account of mis joinder and non joinder of necessary party. Thus, alleging no deficiency in service and prayed for dismissal the present complaint against the answering OP.
3. The complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex.C1 along with documents in the shape of evidence as Ex.C2 to Ex.C9 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, the OP has tendered affidavit Ex.OP1 along with documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP6 and closed the evidence.
-
5. In view of the above discussion, we allow the complaint with the direction to the OP to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and physical harassment along with litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 11,000/-. The OP is further directed to comply with the said order within the period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The file be indexed and consigned to record room.
Announced
November 14, 2022
(Ranjit Singh)
President
(Ranvir Kaur)
Member
