| ORDER | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA (PUNJAB)
CC No. 81 of 27-02-2012 Decided on : 27-04-2012
Rajesh Kumar aged about 40 years S/o Sh. Rattan Lal R/o Bathinda. .... Complainant Versus
District Transport Officer, District Transport Office, Mini Secretariat, Bathinda. Suwidha Centre, Mini Secretariat, Bathinda, through Incharge/Manager. ..... Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM Ms. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member
For the Complainant : Sh. Rajdeep Goyal, counsel for the complainant For the Opposite parties : Sh. O.P. Vinocha, counsel for opposite party No. 1. None for opposite party No. 2.
O R D E R
VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT
The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (here-in-after referred to as ’Act’). Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that he is owner of Motor Cycle bearing registration No. PB-03U-3716. He purchased the said motorcycle by taking loan and the hypothecation of the concerned financer was also got entered in the registration certificate. The complainant cleared the loan amount and applied for the cancellation of the hypothecation from the original registration certificate of the said motorcycle with opposite party No. 1 through opposite party No. 2 on 13-06-2011 vide Application No. 102909/2011 after depositing the requisite fee for the same with opposite party No. 2. The complainant was given the tentative date for delivery of the original R.C. to the complainant after cancellation of hypothecation as 11-07-2011. The complainant visited the office opposite party No. 2 on 11-7-2011 for delivery of original R.C. but he was asked to inquire about the same after about a week. The complainant repeatedly visited the office of opposite party No. 2 for taking delivery of original R.C. but to no effect. Ultimately, the opposite party No. 2 extended the tentative date as 10-08-2011 and thereafter as 28-08-2011. On 28-08-2011, the complainant visited the office of opposite party No. 1 and it was told to him that hypothecation could not be cancelled and the date for delivery of original RC was extended upto 14-10-2011. On 14-10-2011, the date was extended upto 22-10-2011, then 3-11-2011, 8-11-2011 and then the same was again extended upto 15-01-2012. The complainant alleged that he applied for cancellation of the hypothecation on 13-06-2011 i.e. for the last more than seven months but till date the opposite parties have failed to hand-over/return the original registration certificate of the motorcycle of the complainant to him after cancellation of the hypothecation. The complainant has been visiting the office of the opposite parties time and again during the said period of seven months. The motorcycle of the complainant is also lying parked in his house and he has been deprived of using the same due to non-cancellation of hypothecation and in the absence of original R.C. Hence, the complainant has filed the present complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties to return the original R.C after cancellation of the hypothecation with immediate effect and pay him compensation and cost. The opposite party No. 1 filed his written reply and pleaded that the original RC of the complainant might have been received by opposite party No. 2 who is solely responsible if the receipt in question concerns with the actual number of R.C. The receipt produced by the complainant with the complaint cannot be termed or treated as a document in the eye of law and the same has no legal value and all the dates alongwith registration number of the vehicle, if any, has not been written by any officials of the office of the opposite parties rather these are made by the complainant himself or by any private person at the instance of the complainant. The opposite party No. 1 has further pleaded that the complainant is at liberty to obtain duplicate copy of the motorcycle for which he has to submit the requisite papers fully accompanied with the police report and other documents and forms duly filled up and signed by the complainant and the R.C. would be supplied to him within a week without any delay. It has been pleaded that the R.Cs of the vehicles always put into the tray in open on the table. The opposite party No. 2 filed its written reply pleading therein that the complainant has submitted his R.C. for cancellation of hypothecation which was sent alongwith other R.C.s to Sh. Dharamjit Singh, concerned clerk for further action, but the registration certificate in question was not received back from opposite party No. 1 after necessary action. The R.C. in question was got late due to transfer of concerned clerk and retirement of the new clerk. The opposite party No. 2 has further pleaded that the R.C. in question as and when received would be delivered to the complainant. Parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings. Arguments heard. Record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused. The allegation of the complainant is that he applied for cancellation of the hypothecation from the R.C. of his motor cycle bearing Registration No. PB-03U-3716. He submitted the original R.C. alongwith other required documents with opposite party No. 2 against which a receipt Ex. C-2 has been issued to him. Despite his repeated visits, the original R.C. in question has not been returned to him after cancellation of hypothecation. The opposite party No. 1 has denied the issuance of receipt Ex. C-2. The opposite party No. 2 has not denied the issuance of receipt Ex. C-2. The opposite party No. 2 has admitted that the original R.C. bearing No. PB-03U-3716 was sent to opposite party No. 1 but was not received back. The R.C. in question was got late due to transfer of concerned clerk and retirement of new clerk. The matter was brought into the notice of opposite party No. 1 as well his concerned clerk, but no action has been taken so far. As soon as the R.C. in question would be received, it would be delivered to the complainant. Hence from the admission of opposite party No. 2 it stands proved that the complainant applied for cancellation of hypothecation from the R.C. of his motorcycle bearing registration No. PB-03U-3716 and submitted all the required documents alongwith original R.C. with opposite party No. 2 against which a receipt Ex. C-2 has been issued. As is evident from Ex. C-2 the date of delivery of original R.C. after cancellation of hypothecation, has been extended from time to time and the R.C. in original has not yet been delivered to the complainant which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. In view of what has been discussed above, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. This complaint is accepted with Rs. 2000/- as cost and compensation. The opposite parties are directed to deliver the original R.C. of motorcycle bearing No. PB-03U-3716 to the complainant within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned.
Pronounced 27-04-2012 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni) President
(Amarjeet Paul) Member
(Sukhwinder Kaur) Member
| |
