Haryana

Panchkula

CC/165/2015

JARNAIL SINGH. - Complainant(s)

Versus

EM PEE MOTORS LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

TARUN GUPTA.

01 Mar 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PANCHKULA.                                                        

Consumer Complaint No	:	165 of 2015
Date of Institution	:	25.08.2015
Date of Decision	:	01.03.2016

                                                                                          

 

Jarnail Singh son of Sh.Sohan Singh, R/o House No.486, Part-2 Sector, Panchkula.

                                                                                          ….Complainant

Versus

 

Em Pee Motors Limited Plot No.71, Industrial Area Phase-1, Panchkula through its authorized representative.

                                                                                      ….Opposite Party

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Before:                 Mr.Dharam Pal, President.

                             Mrs.Anita Kapoor, Member.

              Mr.S.P.Attri, Member.

 

 

For the Parties:     Mr.Tarun Gupta, Adv., for the complainant. 

Mr.S.R.Bansal, Adv., for the Op.

 

ORDER

(Dharam Pal, President)

 

1.                          The complainant-Jarnail Singh has filed the present complaint against the OP with the averments that he had purchased a Toyata Etios bearing registration No.HR-05-AE-1110 from OP for a sum of Rs.4,60,000/-. At the time of purchasing of car, the OP had assured that all the formalities with regard to ownership and insurance would be done within 15 days. The complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,90,000/- on 05.12.2013 and Rs.2,70,000/- on 19.12.2013. Thereafter the complainant visited the OP and requested for providing transfer papers but it did provide the same. The OP has also not provided the NOC from the original owner and due to this the insurance of the car could not be got renewed and the complainant stopped plying the car on the roads. The complainant has paid full and final amount for the purchase of car but due to the deficiency in service and lapse on the part of the OP he is unable to enjoy the same after one and half year of its purchase. In evidence the complainant has tendered affidavit and documents Annexure CA, Annexure C1 & Annexure C2.

2.                          On notice, OP appeared and contested the complaint of the complainant by filing reply. It has been submitted that the complainant had signed various documents at the time of purchasing of 2^nd hand car and more so delivery-cum-physical possession letter was also signed by him. He was handed over copy of PAN Card and Ration Card etc.  but he has concealed this fact.  The present complaint is not maintainable as it is not a consumer dispute and no unfair trade practice and deficiency in service has been done on the part of OP. Other allegations made by the complainant have been controverted and prayer for the dismissal of the complaint has been made.  In evidence the OP has tendered affidavit and document  Annexure RA and Annexure R1.

3.                          We have heard learned counsel for the parties and appraised the material on record carefully.

4.                          It is not disputed that the complainant had purchased a car from OP and also paid full consideration thereof and the physical possession was also delivered to the complainant by the OP. The grievance of the complainant is that due to inaction on the part of the OP he cannot get the vehicle transferred in his name and even due to non-availability of NOC the insurance of the vehicle could not be renewed. The vehicle was purchased in the month of December, 2013 and the complainant in his complaint has specifically mentioned that the formalities qua ownership and insurance was to be completed within 15 days by the seller/OP but it is strange that after passing of almost 2 years and 9 months the vehicle could not be get transferred in the name of complainant. Though the OP has tried to rebut the pleas made by the complainant by filing reply but perusal of the reply/evidence clearly shows that the OP instead of performing its part qua providing of NOC and other documents for transferring the vehicle or renewing the insurance it kept on avoiding the matter on one pretext or the other. The OP in its reply has mentioned that the documents qua transferring of the vehicle has been given to the complainant but this plea is not supported by any evidence. Another surprising factor which this Forum has noticed that on one hand the OP has denied the version of the complainant but on the other hand during the arguments it has produced the NOC and connected documents to be used in transferring of vehicle and renewing of insurance before this Forum. This step is enough to prove that the OP instead of performing its part has avoided the duty of the seller therefore the complainant had left with no other option but to file the present complaint. The OP has failed to explain as to why it could not provide the necessary documents to the complainant despite several requests. The complainant has been able to prove his case that the OP is deficient in providing service, therefore, the present case deserves acceptance.  

5.                          For the reasons recorded above, the complaint is allowed. The OP is directed as under:-

(i)      To provide the necessary documents to the complainant.

(ii)     To pay Rs.5,000/- to the complainant as compensation for harassment and mental agony.

(iii)    To pay Rs.5,000/- to the complainant as cost of litigation.

 

Let the order b­e complied with within 30 days of the receipt of the certified copy of this order. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of cost and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.

 

 

Announced

01.03.2016     S.P.ATTRI           ANITA KAPOOR            DHARAM PAL

                        MEMBER          MEMBER                                 PRESIDENT

 

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.  

 

                                            

 

                                                          DHARAM PAL                                                                                         PRESIDENT