Punjab

Moga

CC/15/95

Jagdeep Goyal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Hyundai, Godawari Motors - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Ravinderpal Rattian

26 Apr 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MOGA.

 

                                      C.C. No. 95 of 2015

                                                              Instituted on: 4.12.2015

                                                  Decided on: 26.04.2016

 

Jagdeep Goyal son of Wazir Chand, resident of St. no. 1, H. No. 20/640, Prem Nagar, Moga, Tehsil & District Moga.

 

                                                                                                                                       ……….   Complainant 

Versus

 

Hyundai, Godawari Motors, Pvt. Ltd. Opp. Focal Point, Ferozepur Road, Moga, through its Authorized Officer/Manager.

  

 

                                                                                                                                      ………. Opposite Party

 

 

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

 

 

Coram:      Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President

                   Smt. Bhupinder Kaur, Member

Present:      Sh. Ravinder Pal Rattian, Advocate Cl. for complainant.

                   Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Advocate Cl. for opposite party.

 

ORDER :

(Per Ajit Aggarwal, President)

1.                Complainant has filed the instant complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986  (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against Hyundai, Godawari Motors, Pvt. Ltd. Opp. Focal Point, Ferozepur Road, Moga, through its Authorized Officer/Manager (hereinafter referred to as the opposite party) for directing them to release the payment of Rs.7800/- alongwith interest and to pay damages of Rs.20,000/- on account of mental agony, pain etc. and Rs. 15,000/- as litigation expenses or any other additional or alternative relief which this Forum may deem fit and proper be also granted.

2.                 Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that complainant purchased one car Hyundai, Model Grand I-10 Asta (0) GLS BSIV from opposite party on 25.09.2014. The Ex-showroom price of the said vehicle was Rs.5,43,215/- which included VAT Tax, Surcharge, Logistic Charges etc. However, with malafide intention opposite party has not given any bill to the complainant at the time of purchase of vehicle. The complainant deposited @ 6 % on account of registration charges of the abovesaid vehicle with the opposite party. At the time of depositing of registration charges, opposite party assured the complainant that RC will be given to him within 10 days, but the opposite party shown negligence and deficient services by not depositing the registration charges on time and in the meantime Government hiked the registration charges @ 8 % w.e.f 8.10.2014. Due to negligence and deficient service by the opposite party complainant failed to get the Registration Certificate on time, despite visiting the office of opposite party a number of times. Some time after opposite party disclosed the complainant about the abovesaid factual position, then the complainant said it was your fault and you were sole responsible for the same. But the opposite party took the complainant into confidence and assured that the hiked amount of Rs.9800/- will be refunded within a short period. As the complainant had to go out of city, he deposited the said amount with the opposite party on 24.11.2014 but the opposite party refunded only Rs.2000/- to the complainant. The complainant visited the office of opposite party many a times to get the remaining amount, but all in vain. Complainant also got served legal notice dated 22.9.2015 upon the opposite party, through his counsel, but they have not given any reply to the same. Due to negligence act and deficiency in service complainant has suffered mental tension, agony, physical harassment and financial loss. Hence this complaint.

3.                Upon notice, opposite party appeared through his counsel and filed written reply taking certain preliminary objections, inter alia, that complaint is not maintainable in the present form; that the complainant has got no locus-standi to file the present complaint as complainant himselft is at fault in depositing the increase registration fee in time; that the complex question of law is involved in the case, which needs thorough evidence in length, which is not possible with this Forum having limited time span, as such, the matter is liable to be tried by the Civil Court. On merits, it is admitted to be correct that complainant purchased the said car from it and showroom price of the car was Rs.5,43,215/-. Further submitted that the complainant was provided with all the documents including the copies of the bill, as the original were required for applying the registration certificate. At the time of purchase of vehicle, the complainant asked the opposite party that he would tell about the number of vehicle, which he wanted to take, as list of available numbers was given to him on that very day and further it was disclosed to complainant that the Registration fee was likely to be increased in near future, but the complainant did not turn till 8.10.2014. The opposite party never assured for registration within 10 days as alleged, rather he was asked that after disclosing the number of his choice, the RC will be applied and will be supplied to complainant as and when Registration authority will release the same. But the complainant failed to disclose about the choice of his number till 8.10.2014 and on 8.10.2014, the registration fee was enhanced from 6% to 8% and thereafter as and when the complainant told about the number of his choice, he was asked to deposit remaining 2% enhanced fee, but he refused to do so, which caused delay in getting the vehicle registered and as such, there is no fault or negligence on the part of the opposite party. It has been further submitted that the complainant deposited the amount of Rs.9800/- with his free will according to his necessity. However, it is correct that later on Rs.2000/- were refunded to the complainant. However, the opposite party never assured for refund of Rs.9800/- as alleged by the complainant. Other allegations made in the complaint have been denied.

4.                 In order to prove his case, complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex. C-1 and copies of documents Ex. C-2 to Ex. C-13 and closed the evidence.

5.                In rebuttal, the opposite parties tendered in evidence duly sworn affidavit of Sh. Sanjay Roy, Assistant Vice President, Godawari Motors Pvt. Ltd, Moga Ex. OP-1 and closed the evidence.

6.                          We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through record placed on file.

7.                Ld Counsel for complainant vehemently argued that on 25.09.2014, complainant purchased a Hyundai car of model Grand I-10Asta (0) GLS BSIV worth Rs. 5,43,215/-from OP, but at that time, OP did not provide the bill. It is contended that as per rules, Registration Certificate of the vehicle was to be applied by OP and complainant deposited 6% on account of registration charges and OP assured complainant that Registration Certificate would be provided to him within 10 days. It is further contended that OP did not deposit the registration charges deposited by complainant with OP to Registration Authorities in time and meanwhile, Government of Punjab hiked the registration charges from 6% to 8% w.e.f.8.10.2014 and due to this negligence of OP, complainant could not obtain his Registration Certificate in time and had to pay Rs. 9800/-more. It is further contended that OP charged Rs. 9800/-as hiked amount of registration charges from complainant and assured to refund the same within a short interval. OP refunded Rs. 2000/-, but balance amount of Rs. 7800/-is still due towards OP. Complainant visited the office of OP and made many requests to refund his balance amount, but all in vain. Complainant also served legal notice dt. 22.09.2015 to OP, but that also bore no fruit. This act of OP amounts to deficiency in service and has caused great harassment and mental tension to complainant. Ld Counsel for Complainant has prayed for accepting the present complaint and has also requested for compensation and litigation expenses. He has stressed on affidavit Ex C-1, in which all the pleadings made in complaint are reiterated and documents Ex C-2 to 13.

8.                To controvert the allegations levelled by complainant, ld counsel for OP has denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being wrong and incorrect but at the same time admitted before the Forum that complainant purchased the said car  from OP against showroom price of         Rs. 5,43,215/-. It is asserted that OP provided complainant all the documents including copies of bill as original was required for applying registration certificate and at the time of purchase of said car, OP asked complainant to choose the number from the numbers available in the list given to him, but till 8.10.2014, he did not disclose the number of his choice and even at that time, complainant was informed about the likelihood of enhancement in Registration fee. It is further denied that OP ever assured complainant about registration of vehicle in 10 days. It is further averred that registration fee was hiked from 6% to 8% and after 8.10.2014, when complainant gave the number of his choice, he was told to deposit 2% of enhanced fee, which he refused to pay and that became the root cause for delay in registration of vehicle. OP further submitted that complainant deposited Rs. 9,800/- to OP with his own free will and even OP refunded Rs. 2,000/-to complainant, but OP never assured to refund the whole amount of Rs. 9,800/-.

9.                From the careful scruitinization of evidence and documents placed on record and hearing the arguments advanced by respective parties, it is observed that complainant purchased a vehicle from OP and OP did not give proper bill for the same, which is clear from legal notice Ex C-2 adduced by complainant. This document clears the fact that before falling into litigation, complainant made request to OP to issue bill and OP charged 6% on account of registration charges of total value of vehicle. It also reveals the grievance of complainant that OP did not deposit the registration fee in time and caused great delay in registration and also charged Rs. 9800/- more from complainant on account of hike in registration fee. Receipts Ex C-4 to Ex. C-8 alongwith copy of retail invoice Ex C-9 clearly prove and strengthen the pleading of complainant that he paid Rs. 5,43,215/-  to OP for purchase of his car in question and made for registration expenses and further paid Rs. 9800/- on 24.11.2014 towards the enhanced registration charges. Ex C-10 is the copy of mail sent by complainant to OP showing the harassment caused by OP to complainant. Even legal notice issued by complainant to OP served no purpose. Complainant has produced sufficient evidence to prove his case  and  authenticity of documents placed on file and pleadings made by  him can not be denied and it proves that OP have been deficient in providing proper services to complainant and complainant has to suffer unnecessarily for his genuine claim. On the contrary, OP has produced only affidavit Ex.OP-1 and there is no cogent evidence to justify the position of OP clearly. On the other hand, complainant has succeeded in proving his case. Therefore, complainant is entitled to get refund of balance amount of Rs.7800/-, which OP charged from complainant on account of hike in registration fee by Government as sole responsibility for applying for registration certificate lies only with OP and only OP is liable to pay for the same, as OP has not applied for registration certificate in time and thus, complainant is not supposed to suffer any kind of harassment or loss of money due to negligence on the part of OP.

10.              In the light of above discussion and keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we are fully convinced with the pleadings put forward and evidence led by parties and therefore, complaint in hand is hereby accepted with direction to OP to refund the amount of Rs.7,800/-to complainant. OP is further directed to pay interest on aforementioned amount of Rs.7,800/- at the rate of 9% from the date of payment i.e. 24.11.2014 till realization alongwith Rs. 3,000/-(Three thousand only) as compensation for harassment and mental agony besides litigation expenses of Rs. 2,000/-(Two thousand only). Compliance of this order be made within one month of date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which complainant shall be entitled to initiate proceedings under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in open Forum:

Dated: 26.04.2016

 

                                        (Bupinder Kaur)                       (Ajit Aggarwal)

                                              Member                                     President