Complainant Jaspal Singh has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against the opposite parties and praying that opposite parties be directed to issue R.C. and other documents required for running the tractor in question.

2.       The case of the complainant in brief is that he a citizen of India bering Adhaar Card No.2655 4750 3136 and he purchased a Farmtrac Tractor (6055) by paying Rs.7,25,000/- in the year 2016 and exchanged his old Farmtrac 60 with Rs.3,10,000/- with the same company. It was pleaded that new tractor (Farmtrac 6055) was financed by the complainant with the opposite party No.2 and opposite party No.2 transferred Rs.4,62,660/- in the account of opposite party No.1. It was further pleaded that full payment was made by the complainant to the opposite parties but even then opposite party No.1 neither issued the registration certificate (R.C.) nor the insurance of the said tractor rather the agent of opposite party No.1 had taken Rs.7,000/- from the complainant for preparing the R.C. and other documents for which complainant is entitled. It was also pleaded that a legal notice was also issued to opposite party No.1 but they denied to accept it. It was next pleaded that the cause of action has arisen when the opposite parties refused to redress the legal claim of the complainant, hence this complaint.

3.       Notice was issued to opposite party No.1 but they did not appear and prefer to proceed exparte vide order dated 04.06.2019.

4.       Notice was also issued to opposite party No.2 who appeared through their counsel and filed written reply by taking the preliminary objections that present complaint is not maintainable, complainant has not come to the Court/Commission with clean hands, present complaint is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties and complainant is not a consumer of the opposite party as per allegations of the complaint. It was stated that opposite party No.2 financed the vehicle and at that time, complainant assured the opposite party to discharge the liability in time and a loan agreement was duly executed between the parties and also a loan was disbursed vide loan account No.6547571 on 15.10.2016 and Rs.4,62,110/- was financed but complainant committed default after getting the financial assistance and opposite party has right to recover the same by adopting legal method. On merits, all the averments made in the complaint have been denied and lastly prayed for dismissal of complaint with heavy cost.

5.       In order to prove the case, counsel for the complainant had filed copies of documents Ex.CW-1/A to Ex.CW-1/J.

6.       On the other hand counsel for the opposite party No.2 had failed affidavit of Parwinder Singh with copies of documents Ex.OP-2/1 to Ex.OP-2/5.

7.       Written arguments filed by complainant but not filed by opposite party No.2.

8.       We have carefully examined all the documents/evidence produced on record for its contained statutory merit and have also judiciously considered and perused the arguments duly put forth by the learned counsels along with the incidental scope of adverse inference for some of the documents that have been somehow ignored to be produced by the contesting litigants.

9.       From the over all circumstances as enumerated in respective pleadings of the parties, it reveals that the factum with regard to the purchase of  Farmtrac Tractor (6055) by paying Rs.7,25,000/- in the year 2016  and exchanged his old Farmtrac 60 with Rs.3,10,000/- with the same company. The tractor was financed by the complainant with the opposite party No.2 and opposite party No.2 transferred Rs.4,62,660/- in the account of opposite party No.1.and full payment was made by the complainant to the opposite party no.1 but even then opposite party No.1 neither issued the registration certificate (R.C.) nor the insurance of the said tractor rather had taken Rs.7,000/- from the complainant for preparing the R.C. Thereafter complainant sent legal notice but the opposite party no.1 refused the same. It is made out that there is no dispute between complainant and opposite party no.2 rather it is the opposite party no.1 who failed to perform its duty.

10.     Keeping in view, we conclude that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party no.1. Hence, the present complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party No.1 is directed to return the original registration certificate and other relevant documents of the vehicle in question to the complainant and is further directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.5,000/- for mental agony and harassment and Rs.2,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

11.      The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.

12.     Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record.                                                                                                           

                              (Kiranjit Kaur Arora)

                                                                         President  

Announced:                                          (B.S.Matharu)

FEB. 16,2023                                                Member

*YP*