Order-12.
Date-21/04/2015.
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that for earning bread and butter for himself and his family members he intended to purchase a car and OP is running its business from the above address as financial aiding and organization and for which complainant went to the OP for purchasing such car and after negotiations price of the car was fixed at Rs.1,80,000/-. Accordingly, OP advised complainant initially down payment of Rs.50,000/- for taking delivery of the said vehicle and further complainant signed the blank Hire Purchased Agreement and handed over few blank signed post dated cheques to the OP at their office and after signing the said agreement and payment of Rs.50,000/- complainant asked the OP to supply money receipt, the road permit of the said vehicle and the said agreement the OP stated that within a very short time those documents will be supplied but since signing the said agreement and paying of the initial down payment the OP handed over the said vehicle to the complainant but has not yet handed over the documents of the car including the road permit but OP asked the complainant to pay monthly EMIs and complainant as an ordinary people relying upon the OP began to pay monthly EMIs to the tune of Rs.8,300/- but till today OP has not issued a single scrap of paper in support of the said car. Thereafter, several occasions complainant requested the OP to supply the money receipt and other papers relating to car but OP did not comply for which ultimately complainant after depositing 8 EMIs stopped all payment but all on a sudden complainant received a letter on 05-08-2014 wherefrom it came to learn that OP tried to convince that the complainant failed and neglected to pay EMIs and OP demanded a sum of Rs.2,54,536/- but fact remains copy of the agreement was not supplied by the OP to the complainant. no related documents supplied to the complainant for which the complainant unable to comply though he has invested huge amount and instead of receiving any feed back to the reply letter complainant received an application of Arbitration & Conciliation Act wherefrom it appears that Arbitration proceeding was initiated by the OP before the Sole Arbitrator Mr. Aniruddha Mohanta and the OP claimed a sum of Rs.2,54,536/- and in the above circumstances, complainant being deceived by the OP and for negligent and deficient manner of service on the part of the OP, has prayed for such relief against the OP and for directing the OP to supply the road permit, Hire Purchase Agreement, Money Receipt etc. and other documents in related to said car and for compensation etc.
Truth is that notice was served upon the OP and OP received it but after that OP did not turn up to contest the case for which the case is heard ex parte.
Decision with Reasons
On proper consideration of the entire materials on record and also considering the complaint including the documents it is clear that the complainant got the car being registration No.WB 04C 9551 from the OP on payment of Rs.50,000/- and it is also proved from the receipt Annexure-A when complainant paid 8 EMIs to the extent of Rs.8,300/- per month but anyhow even OP got such chance but did not appear to contest the case and also has not shown his interest to deny the or challenge the allegation as made by the complainant, at the same time it is a fact that the OP handed over the said car to the complainant which is the possession of the OP and truth is that complainant for the purpose of earning his livelihood and to maintain his family purchased the said car and fact remains at the time of handed over the car or the said taxi vehicle OP was bounded to hand over all the papers including road permit etc. because complainant purchased the same from the OP not from the other purchase so it is the duty of the OP to handover and supply all the relevant papers of the vehicle to the complainant for the purpose of using but that has not been done and fact remains still now OP is the owner of the said vehicle. Considering that fact it is clear that OP deceived the complainant even after receipt of Rs.50,000/- and 8 EMIs from the complainant and no doubt this is the position of all the private financier who deceives the customers in such a manner in all respect and when all the documents related to the said vehicle has not been handed over to the complainant as yet then invariably complainant is not in a position to ply the vehicle and to earn money for his livelihood. So, apparently relying upon the unchallenged testimony of the complainant including the documents we are convinced to hold that the complainant was deceived by the OP no doubt, OP did not render service properly and also did not give any chance to ply the said vehicle because at the time of the Hire Purchase of the said vehicle related documents including road permit was not handed over by the OP. It is no doubt an unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. No doubt in this case, complainant has already ventilated that an Arbitration Proceeding has been started and in this regard we have gathered that even any arbitration proceeding is pending against the complainant, the C.P. Act cannot be a bar when complainant validly instituted the complaint under the C.P. Act and as per judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court it is clear that as per Section 3 of the said Act the provision of the Act are in addition to and not in derogation of any other law for the time being enforced and in the light of the jugements of Delhi High Court in LPA No.204 of 2009 and C.M. No.6638 of 2009 dated 14-05-2009 (M/s. Hindustan Motors Ltd. vs. Amardeep Singh Wirk & Ors.) we are inclined to hold that there is no room for any doubt that proceedings under the C.P. Act and in a Civil Court can simultaneously go on, even if the issues involved in the two proceedings are substantially similar. The remedies are independent of each other. The existence of parallel or other adjudicatory Forums cannot take away or exclude the jurisdiction under the C.P. Act. So, considering the above legal position we are convinced to hold that the arbitration proceeding cannot give the relief as guaranteed by the Consumer Forum and arbitration proceeding cannot decide deficient, negligent manner of service or deceitful manner of service and when Consumer Forum are not debarred to decide the consumer dispute and as per law and fact remains the present complaint was filed wherefrom it is found that it is a consumer dispute but it is not in respect of any agreement so, in view of the above facts and circumstances, we are convinced to hold that the complaint is maintainable in view of the above judgment and also other judgments of Supreme Court reported in Union of India, vs. Major Bahadur Singh 2006(1) SCC 368.
In the result, the case succeeds.
Hence,
Ordered
That the case be and the same is allowed ex parte against the OP with a cost of Rs.5,000/-.
OP is directed to handover all documents related to the said vehicle bearing no.WB 04C 9551 including the Road Permit etc. to the complainant within one month from the date of this order if OP fails to handover all those documents in that case OP shall have to take back the said vehicle from the possession of the complainant on proper receipt and refund total amount of Rs.50,000/- and also Rs.66,400/-(EMI at the rateRs.8,300/- X 8 months) within one month from the date of expiry of first month as per spirit of this order and if OP fails to comply the order within the stipulated period in that case OP shall have to pay penal damages at the rateRs.10,000/- per month till full satisfaction of the decree and if it is collected it shall be deposited to this Forum.
On completion of two months from the date of this order alleged agreement shall be treated as cancelled.
OP is hereby directed to comply with this order failing which penal action shall be started against him for which he shall be prosecuted and further penalty and fine may be imposed.
