Haryana

Ambala

CC/464/2022

KULDEEP SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

HARAYAN MOTORS,AUTHORIZED DEALER OF HERO CYCLE . - Opp.Party(s)

VIPINJOT

22 Apr 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

Complaint case no.	:	464 of 2022
Date of Institution	:	13.12.2022
Date of decision	:	22.04.2024

 

Kuldeep Singh S/o Ujjager Singh R/o Village Faridpur, Saran, Yamuna Nagar, Haryana-133202.

……. Complainant

                                                Versus

1. Haryana Motors, Authorized Dealer of Hero Motor Cycle through its Authorized Signatory Tarun Mittal, 123-A, Staff Road, Railway Station Road, Near 9 Gaja Peer, Ambala Cantt 133001.
2. Mittal Motors, Mohri Road, Village Kesri, District Ambala Authorized Representative of Dealer, Haryana Motors, Hero motor cycle
3. Hero Motocorp Ltd. The Grand Plaza Plot No.2, Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, Phase-II, New Delhi 110070.

….….  Opposite Parties

Before:       Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                             Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member,

          Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.           

 

Present:-     Shri Vipinjot Singh Thind, Advocate, counsel for the complainant.

                   OPs No.1 and 2 already ex parte vide order dated 06.02.2023.

                   Shri Dinesh Sharma, Advocate, counsel for OP No.3.

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

1. To pay the cost of the Motor Cycle i.e. Rs. 75,000/-
2. To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation to the complainant, for causing harassment, agony and mental torture, financial loss, to him.
3. To pay Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses
4. To Issue Original Bill and insurance policy as well as Registration Certificate of the motorcycle.
382.  

Grant any other relief which this Hon’ble Commission may deems fit.

 

2.             Brief facts of the case are that the complainant wanted to purchase a Hero HF Delux self start Motorcycle, in the month of April 2021 and as such visited the showroom of OP No.1. The complainant was advised to visit the showroom of OP No.2 for purchase of Motor Cycle on the ground that the OPs have set up a festival counter with the name of "Haryana Motor Festival Counter". He was also told that OP No.2 is Authorized Representative Dealer (ARD) of OP No.1. Accordingly on 16.04.2021 the complainant visited the show room of OP No.2 at Village Kesri. The complainant was advised to purchase motorcycle from their another showroom at Shahabad Barara Road, Village Ugala at “Haryana Motor Festival Counter”. As such, the complainant visited the said site and the official of OP No.2 attended the complainant and gave the details qua price and estimate including the registration Charges, Insurance, and Temporary Number charges of the vehicle. The complainant was asked to make payment of Rs.46,000/- under the scheme of exchange of old motorcycle, which was accepted by him and he was ready to exchange his old motorcycle bearing registration number HR-02-AN-4470. Accordingly, the complainant purchased new motor cycle Hero HF Deluxe, bearing Chassis No.MHA02476, Engine No.MHA2607 against  delivery challan bearing Sr. No 366 dated 16.04.2021. The complainant made the payment of Rs.46,000/- in cash on 01.05.2021 against the said motor cycle to OP No.2. However, when the  complainant inquired about the bill of motor cycle and other necessary documents like insurance policy etc. from OP No.2, it was stated that the same will be issued by the OP No.1 and that registration certificate and bill of the motor cycle will be issued within 20 days.  The complainant took the delivery of motor cycle and came to his house. After about twenty days and thereafter also, so many times, the complainant  visited the showroom of OPs No.1 and 2 for getting the original bill, registration certificate and insurance policy but no satisfactory reply was given by them.  Even OP No.3 who is manufacturer of the motorcycle in question did not redress the grievance of the complainant.  The complainant is facing so many problems due to non viability of registration certificate as well as sale letter/bill of above said motor cycle. Ultimately the complainant got served legal notices dated 15.10.2022 and 17.10.2022 upon the OPs in the matter but to no avail.   Hence, the present complaint.
3.           Upon notice, none has appeared on behalf of the OPs No.1 and 2 before this Commission, therefore, they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 06.02.2023.
4.           Upon notice, OP No.3 appeared and filed written version wherein it raised preliminary objections to the effect that the present complaint is misconceived and untenable; the complainant has not come to this Commission with clean hands and has intentionally and deliberately suppressed material facts;  the complainant has not filed any acceptable evidence in the complaint or in support of the cause of action  against OP No.3 etc. On merits, it has been stated that as per business model of the OP No.3, it sells its vehicles, spare parts, etc. to its Authorized Dealers on principle to principle basis. Once the products are sold to the Authorized Dealers, OP No.3 has no effective control over the same. Any transaction that takes place between the customers and the Authorized Dealers, OP No.3 has no role to play in it whatsoever. Similarly in the present case, OP No.3 played no role in dealing between the OPs No.1 and 2 with the complainant and it is the purview of the OPs No.1 and 2 to provide Vehicle and to do documentation work as per their mutual understanding. However, it is for OPs No.1 and 2 to explain the factual position to defend the allegations, which have been allegedly levelled by the complainant. The complainant has unnecessarily impleaded OP No.3 in the array of parties and hence the complaint deserves to be dismissed qua OP No.3 or in the alternative OP No.3 is to be discharged from the instant complaint.  The complainant has not raised any issue regarding warranty of the vehicle or any services issues. In the latest Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal no. 574/2021 titled as "Tata Motors ltd. vs. Antoniao Paulo Vaz & Anr", decided on 18.02.2021, held very clearly laid down that manufacturing company can't be held liable for the acts which were not within its ambit and not under its control. Similarly, in the present case also OP No.3 has no control over registration process of the vehicle purchased by the complainant. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by the OP No.3 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with costs.
5.           Complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure CW1/A, alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 to C-10 and closed the evidence of the complainant. Learned counsel for OP No.3 tendered affidavit of Mr.Siddharth Tewari, Authorized Representative of OP No.3-Hero MotoCorp Ltd. (OP-3) having its office at the Grand Plaza, Plot No.2, Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, Phase-II, New Delhi-110070 as Annexure OP-3/A alongwith document- Annexure OP-3/B and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.3.
6.           We have heard the learned counsel for complainant and learned counsel for OP No.3 and have also carefully gone through the case file.
7.           Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the complainant made the payment of Rs.46,000/- in cash on 01.05.2021 for the purchase of the motor cycle in question to the OP No.2. Despite receiving the entire sale consideration, the OPs did not provide him the documents, as a result of which, he could not get the vehicle registered in his name. The OPs thus have indulged into unfair trade practice and are also deficient in providing service.
8.           On the other hand, learned counsel for OP No.3 while reiterating the objections raised in the written version submitted that OP No.3 sells its vehicles, spare parts, etc. to its Authorized Dealers on principle to principle basis. He further submitted that once the products are sold to the Authorized Dealers, OP No.3 has no effective control over the same. In the present case, OP No.3 played no role in dealing between the OPs No.1 and 2 with the complainant and it is the purview of the OPs No.1 and 2 to provide vehicle and to do documentation work as per their mutual understanding and if they failed to do so, OP No.3 cannot be held responsible for that. 
9.           It may be stated here that perusal of Motorcycle Delivery Challan bearing Sr. No 366 dated 16.04.2021, Annexure C-2 reveals that the motorcycle in question bearing Chassis No.MHA02476, Engine No.MHA02607 was delivered to the complainant, by OP No.2, from Village Kesri, District Ambala, for total cost of Rs.46000/-. In the said Motorcycle Delivery Challan, it is mentioned that the amount of Rs.46000/- is balance to be paid by the complainant. In the joint undertaking, executed between the parties, Annexure C-3, it is also mentioned that the amount of Rs.46,000/- is balance to be paid by the complainant. It is the definite case of the complainant that he paid an amount of Rs.46,000/- in cash, to OPs No.1 and 2, after withdrawing the same from his bank on 01.05.2021. To this effect, the complainant has placed on record the statement of account of Punjab and Sind Bank, Annexure C-7, showing that he had withdrawn an amount of Rs.50,000/- on 01.05.2021. However, as stated above, notice of this complaint was sent to OPs No.1 and 2 seeking their version, yet, nobody appeared on their  behalf, despite service,  as a result whereof, they were  proceeded against ex-parte on 06.02.2023. This act of the OPs No.1 and 2 draws an adverse inference against them. The non-appearance of OPs No.1 and 2 shows that they have nothing to say in their defence against the plea taken by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant went unrebutted & uncontroverted. Facing with this situation, we have no reason to disbelieve the contention of the complainant that despite receiving the entire sale consideration, the OPs did not provide him the necessary documents. By not providing the documents referred to above, despite the fact that the complainant had cleared all his payment, he has been caused a lot of mental agony and harassment, as till date he is unable to get his vehicle registered with the registering authority, which act amounts to deficiency in providing service and adoption of unfair trade practice on the part of OPs No.1 and 2   
10.           Since, no deficiency in providing service has been proved on the part of OP No.3 as such present complaint filed against it is liable to be dismissed.
11.           In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby dismiss the present complaint against OP no.3 and partly allow the same against OPs No.1 and 2 and direct them, jointly and severally, in the following manner:-
    1. To issue the necessary documents in respect of the motorcycle in question and compete all the necessary formalities for getting the motorcycle in question registered from the registering authority, within the period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the same, failing which OPs No.1 and 2 shall be liable to pay penalty @Rs.50/- per day from the date of default, till realization.
    2. To pay Rs.3,000/-, as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant and Rs.2,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant, within the period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the same, failing which these amounts shall carry interest @6% from the date of default, till realization.     

 

              Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced:- 22.04.2024

 

(Vinod Kumar Sharma)	(Ruby Sharma)	(Neena Sandhu)
Member	Member	President