BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.67 of 2019

      Date of Instt. 28.03.2019

      Date of Decision: 10.08.2022

Rajesh Sharma S/o Sh. Darshan Lal R/o H. No.WX-255, Basti Nau, Basti Guzan, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

Fateh Motors, 1, Hardev Nagar, Kapurthala Road, Opp. Sports College, Jalandhar through authorized signatory.

….….. Opposite Party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj             (President)

                   Smt. Jyotsna                            (Member)

                   Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon       (Member)                                

Present:       Sh. T. K. Badhan, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.

                   Smt. Harleen Kaur, Adv. Counsel for OP.

Order

Dr. HarveenBhardwaj (President)

1.                The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein it is alleged that the complainant had purchased Motor Cycle Model Royal Enfield Classic 350- Reddtich Red from the OP by making down payment and the said Motor Cycle was got hypotheticated from Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Co. Pvt. Ltd. The OP has issued invoices of the said purchase of Motor Cycle on 01.01.2019 and the challan form has also been issued by the OP on 31.12.2018 to the complainant. At the time of sale of the said motor cycle, the sales executive of the OP has assured that the registration number of motor cycle will be allotted as per choice of complainant. The complainant has disclosed this choice to the sales executive as well as authorized signatory of the OP that he intended to get 77 number in the last of registration of motorcycle. On the request of the complainant it was admitted by the OP that they will allot the same registration number as assurance given by them. The complainant shocked to know when number of his choice was not allotted to the motor cycle which was purchased by him from the OP. The complainant had requested again to the OP and one lady sales executive of OP had again assured that registration number of the motor cycle will be allotted to the complainant as earlier committed by them. The complainant got her conversation of call recorded in his mobile phone, it reveals from the voice of sales executive of the OP that they have assured the registration number as per choice of complainant. The complainant has also lodged telephonic complaint to the customer care with regard to the non-performance on the part of the OP as they have assured. The act and conduct of the OP amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to pay the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who filed written reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the consumer complaint is not maintainable as the averments made therein do not substantiate any fault, imperfection, short-coming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance, which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or as undertaken to be performed by the OP in pursuance to the sale of Motorcycle, Model Royal Enfield Classic 350 made by OP to the complainant. It is further averred that the complaint is knowingly false and purposely vexatious to the knowledge of the complainant and has been filed with malafide intention and ulterior and ulterior motive and is liable to be dismissed with exemplary costs. It is further averred that the complainant has not approached this Commission with clean hands and has deliberately not disclosed the complete and true facts in the complaint and therefore the complaint is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone. The complainant is barred, stopped and precluded from filing the present complaint due to his own acts of admission, commission and omission. The OP craves the indulgence of this Commission to add, alter, amend, and supplant the submissions made in this reply or place on record additional documents, if deemed necessary. The OP or any of its sale executive never assured the complainant about the alleged allotment of registration number as per the choice of the complainant. Complainant never disclosed his choice of alleged allotment of registration number to the OP or any of its sales executive as alleged in the complaint at the time of purchase of the said vehicle. It is further averred that the affidavit attached with the complaint has not been properly verified as per the requirement under law. The complaint is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of the necessary party. On merits, all the allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

3.                Rejoinder to the written statement filed by the complainant, whereby reasserted the entire facts as narrated in the complaint and denied the allegations raised in the written statement. 

4.                In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties have produced on the file their respective evidence.

5.                We have heard the arguments from learned counsel for the respective parties and have also gone through the case file very minutely.

6.                The complainant has alleged that he purchased the motorcycle from the OP. The OP assured him that the registration number of the motor cycle will be allotted to him as per his choice. He disclosed his choice of intending to get 77 number in the last of registration of motorcycle. The OP assured for the same, but did not allot him the number of his choice. Therefore, there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and there is unfair trade practice.

7.                The complainant has proved on record the invoice of purchasing Royal Enfield Classic 350-Reddtich Ex.C-1 alongwith copy of the insurance of the motor cycle. Ex.C-2 is the receipt of the amount of the motorcycle inclusive of VAT. The complainant has also produced on record the CD, which has been opened, but the same is broken and could not be played. Moreso, there is no document on the record to authenticate the alleged conversation between the complainant and the sales executive of the OPs.

8.                The OPs on the other hand produced on record Ex.OP-1, which show the purchase of vehicle and the same was financed through Cholamandalam. The amount of Rs.11,800/- was taken for RC and Cow Tax, which is evident from Ex.OP-3. The OP has also produced on record Ex.OP-2, the list showing the detail of registration marks of choice in each series. As per this document, Rs.5000/- is the reserve fee for any registration mark of choice other than the registration marks mentioned in the serial No.1 to 6 within the district. The complainant has sought his choice with last 77 number and as per this series, Rs.12,500/- is reserved fee for the numbers ending with 77 number and for remaining numbers, he had to deposit Rs.5000/- as a reserve fee, but the complainant has not deposited Rs.5000/- as reserve fee for obtaining the number of his choice nor the complainant has proved on record that the OP ever assured him to allot the number of his choice. The complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and thus the complaint of the complainant is dismissed with no order of costs. Parties will bear their own costs. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

9.                Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated          Jaswant Singh Dhillon    Jyotsna               Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj     

10.08.2022         Member                          Member           President