DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 19^th  day of April, 2024

Present      :   Sri. Vinay Menon V., President

                   :   Smt. Vidya A., Member             

                  :   Sri. Krishnankutty N.K., Member                                Date of Filing: 07/09/2020    

              CC/102/2020

Santhoshkumar,

S/o. Chanthu,

Kadampottu Padath,

Vattambalam, Kumaramputhur,

Palakkad – 678 583.                                                   -           Complainant

(By Adv.  Pramod P.K.)

                                                                                      Vs

1. Incheon Motors Pvt.Ltd. – Thrissur,

NH544, Kochi-Salem Highway,

Marathakkara Post, Thrissur – 680 306

Rep.by its Managing Director.

2. Joint RTO,

Office of Sub RTO,

Changaleeri Road,

Kodathipadi, Mannarkkad,

Palakkad – 678 582.                                                   -           Opposite parties

(O.P.1 by Adv. M/s Isaac Thomas, Chandra Pillai,

                           Abraham P.G. & Redson Skaria

  O.P.2 is Ex-parte)        

O R D E R

By Sri. Vinay Menon V., President

1. Skeletally stated, complainant is aggrieved by the excess of vehicle tax that he had to pay owing to alleged delay on the part of staff of the 1^st OP. He states that even though the entire payments were effected by 21/3/2020, registration formalities were completed only by late April forcing him to cough up an additional amount of Rs.19,677/- which was the difference in tax. He was forced to pay this excess amount owing to deficiency in service on the part of O.P.1. O.P.2 is impleaded by way of abundant caution.
2. OP1 filed detailed version stating that the complainant had effected payment by 21/3/2020. But owing to nation-wide lock-down in view of Covid pandemic, registration process could not be completed within the stipulated period and as can be expected in the normal course of business. Tax was paid in accordance with the directions of the Govt. and as could be seen in the Parivahan Portal where vehicles are registered.
3. OP2 filed version stating that the 1^st OP paid motor vehicle tax by 28/4/2020 and registration process were completed with no scope whatsoever for deficiency.
4. The following issues are framed for consideration:

1. Whether there is inordinate delay owing to deficiency in service on the part of OP1?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs sought for?
3. Whether there is any other deficiency in service on the part of opposite party 1?
4. Any other reliefs?

5.         (i)       Evidence of complainant comprised of proof affidavit and Exhibits A1 to A16.   Marking of Exts.A4, A5, A6, A7 and A16 were objected to on the ground they are computer generated documents unaccompanied by Section 65 (B) certification.

                                    Since this Commission is not bound by the tenets of Indian Evidence Act and in the absence of a plea that the said documents are forged or fabricated, above objections are over-ruled.

(ii)    OP1 filed proof affidavit and marked Exts.B1, B1(a) to B9.  Marking of Exts.B2 is objected to on the ground that it is a screen shot and can be edited or be photoshopped. Marking Exts.B3 to B7 are objected as it does not pertain to the subject matter or issues in this dispute. Marking of Ext.B8 is objected to as the same does not pertain to the complainant or the complainant’s account.

                       Complainant’s case as regards Ext. B2 is that it can be forged or photoshopped. But the complainant did not adduce any evidence to prove that the said document is edited or photoshopped. Hence said objection is over-ruled.

                       Upon going through the documents, we find that there is prima facie merit in the contention that Ext.B3 to B7 does not pertain to the complainant’s case. Hence, these documents cannot be relied upon in evidence. They stand rejected.

(iii)  Exts.B10 to B14 were marked while cross examining the witness for OP2.  At the time of cross examination these documents were marked as Exts. X series. But upon a later inspection we found the mistake and corrected the nomenclature on the records and renumbered the said Exhibits in continuation as Ext. B series from Ext. B10 to B14.

(iv)       Witnesses for OPs 1 & 2 were cross examined as DW1 and DW2 respectively.

            Issue No.1

6.         Complainant alleges that he had paid the entire consideration by 21/03/2020. Said pleading is admitted by the 1^st O.P. Documents were handed over to O.P.2 for registration on 28/04/2020. The sole question that requires answer is whether this delay can be attributed to deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.1.

7.         Government of Kerala declared lock-down in view of Covid pandemic on 21/03/2020, followed by nationwide lock-down on 24/03/2020. Such a situation cannot be equated with the normal times. Confusion and turmoil prevailed with nations trying to fight the pandemic. We can perceive the conduct of O.P.1 in not handing over the documents to the O.P.2 to be a deficiency in service, in the normal course of events. But O.P.1, just like any other person, was a victim of Covid pandemic.

8.         It is true that O.P.1 had carried out works using skeletal staff.  But we are unable to fathom accurately the correct working condition of the O.P.1 from 21/03/3020 onwards from the evidence adduced.

9.         Therefore, we are not inclined to view the delay, in the facts and circumstances of the case, to be a deficiency in service.

            Issue No. 2

10.       In the circumstances discussed in issue 1 we hold that the complainant is not entitled to the reliefs sought for in the complaint.  

             Issue No. 3

11.       Even though not a part of the pleadings, one aspect of the proceedings/conduct of the 1^st O.P.  stands out.  

Ext.B8 is a document produced and marked by OP1. This is a vehicle receipt voucher dated 9/5/2020 for Rs.12,351/-. Ext.B8 was produced by the 1^st  OP to prove that the complainant had made delayed payments and final payment was made only on 9/5/2020.

 12.      Version pleadings are to the effect that complainant effected payments only by 21/3/2020. OP1 could not carry out further proceedings in view of Covid pandemic and lock down. The story that complainant effected final payment on 09/05/2020 was a fresh one brought out in evidence and do not find a place in the pleadings. It is the basic dictum of law that facts not pleaded cannot be proved. Therefore, we reject the fresh story raised by the 1^st OP by marking Ext.B8.

13.       Be that as it may, when read in conjunction with Ext.A15, the authenticity of Ext.B8 comes under suspicion. Ext.A15 is a tax invoice issued by OP1 in favour of the complainant. This document is original. The grand total of the cost of the car is Rs.10,41,131/-. The total amount comes to Rs.10,51,542/-. In the version filed, the 1^st O.P. has not pleaded that the complainant has not effected complete payments. Au contraire, they had pleaded that final payments were effected  on 21/03/2020.

These facts read together, we come to a conclusion that Ext.B8 is a document concocted to defraud a right conferred upon the complainant by the C.P. Act, ie. the right to seek redressal of grievance.

14.       This conduct on the part of 1^st OP is nothing short of vexatious and malicious in nature and an attempt at scuttling the rights of the consumer. We hold that this is a deficiency in service on the part of 1^st OP.

Issue No. 4

15.       In the result, based on the observations and findings in issue no.3 above, we hold as below:

1.         There is deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.1 in concocting evidence to misguide this Commission and to illegally defeat the rights of the complainant. 

2.         The O.P.1 is directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation for their deficiency in service.  

3.         Complainant is entitled to a pay  cost of Rs.1,00,000/- payable by the 1^st O.P.

4.         The above directives shall be complied within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the O.P. shall pay an amount of Rs.1,000/ per month or part thereof from the date of this Order till the date of compliance of the directives herein.  

5.         OP2 is absolved of any liability.

16.       Accordingly, this complaint is disposed off.  

                        Pronounced in open court on this the 19^th  day of April,  2024.       

                             Sd/-                                                                                                                             

                                                                                                                                                  Vinay Menon V

                                                                                   President

                                                                                         Sd/-

                          Vidya.A

                                              Member         

                               Sd/-

                Krishnankutty N.K.

                                                                                                                                                   Member            

APPENDIX

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant

Ext.A1   - Original vehicle receipt voucher dated 14/01/2020  

Ext.A2  –  Original vehicle receipt voucher dated 20/03/2020  for Rs.80,278/-

Ext.A3 -   Copy of loan account details.       

Ext.A4  -   Original vehicle receipt voucher dated 20/03/2020  for Rs.98,000/-    

Ext.A5  –  Copy of temporary certificate of registration

Ext.A6   –  Copy of tax license                                   

Ext.A7  -  Copy of printout of receipt dated 25/5/2020

Ext.A8  -   Copy of lawyers notice dated 21/07/2020

Ext.A9  -   Original of postal receipt and AD card

Ext.A10  - Original of notice in reply to Ext.A8  

Ext.A11  - Print out of email communication dated 22/3/2020  

Ext.A12  -  Copy of discharge summary dated 2/3/2015

Ext.A13  -   Original discharge summary dated 6/10/2016

Ext.A14 -   Copy of printout of receipt dated 28/4/2020

Ext.A15  -  Original tax invoice dated 31/3/2020

Ext.A16  -   Printout of email communication dated 21/3/2020

Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite party:

Ext.B1   -  Original authorisation favouring Pramod G Menon

Ext.B1(a) – Original authorisation favouring Rijo Varghese

Ext.B2  – Screenshot of registration proceedings   

Ext.B3 – Screenshot of E Vahan Registration Portal         

Ext.B4  - Printout of owner details showing the name Aneesha Ahamed Chiravattath      

Ext.B5  – Printout of some vehicles details.

Ext.B6   – Screenshot of some Alert in a vehicle detail                                    

Ext.B7  -  Screenshot of Insurance details of some vehicles  

Ext.B8  - Copy of vehicle receipt voucher dated 9/5/2020

Ext.B9  -   Copy of Kerala Gazette dated 31/3/2020 showing GO (P)No.18/2020/TRANS

Ext.B10  - Copy of dealer treasury report.   

Ext.B11  - Print out of details of vehicles registered between 23/3/2020 to 31/3/2020  

Ext.B12  - Printout of registered vehicle details pertaining to vehicle bearing No.KL-50-J-1106  

Ext.B13  - Printout of application / registration / chasis number   for vehicle bearing

                  No.KL-50-J-1106

Ext.B14(1)  - Copy of certificate of inspection to be issued by approved dealer.

Ext.B14(2)  - Copy of application for registration of Motor vehicle.

Ext.B14(3) – Copy of sale certificate

Court Exhibit:  Nil

Third party documents:  Nil

 Witness examined on the side of the complainant: Nil

Witness examined on the side of the opposite party:  

DW1 – Rijo Varghese, AGM, OP1

DW2 – N.A.Morris, Joint RTO, Mannarkkad (OP2)

Court Witness: Nil

NB : Parties are directed to take back all extra set of  documents submitted in the proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5) of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 failing which they will be weeded out.