Haryana

Panchkula

cc/118A/2016

NISHA BANSAL. - Complainant(s)

Versus

LINK USTAV - Opp.Party(s)

COMPLAINANT IN PERSON.

11 Aug 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,  PANCHKULA.                                                            

Consumer Complaint No	:	118 of 2016
Date of Institution	:	12.05.2016
Date of Decision	:	11.08.2016

                                                                                          

Mrs. Nisha Bansal w/o Mr.K.C.Bansal, R/o H.No.170-A, Sector-2, Panchkula.

                                                                                        ….Complainant

Versus

 

M/s Link Utsav, Registration Plates Pvt. Ltd., 1^st Floor, Bus Stand, Sector-5, Panchkula.

                                                                                        ….Opposite Party

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

Before:                 Mr.Dharam Pal, President.

Mrs.Anita Kapoor, Member.

                             Mr.S.P.Attri, Member.

 

For the Parties:     Mr.Krishan Chander Bansal, authorized representative for the complainant. 

Op already ex-parte.

ORDER

(Dharam Pal, President)

1. The complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Op with the averments that she deposited Rs.730/- on 09.04.2015 for High Security Number Plate of her two vehicles i.e. No.HR-03H-6258 and HR-03N-6832 with Link Utsav Registration Plates Pvt. Ltd vide cash receipt No.CHD/CHS 00117 (Annexure C-1) dated 09.04.2015 but the HSRP of the vehicles has not been issued by the OP so far. The complainant visited many times at the office of Op to collect the car number plates but to no avail. The complainant approached Mr.Gaurav who was looking after the HSRP work in Haryana in the office of DC, Panchkula who assured the complainant that it would get done within a week but to no avail. Thereafter, the complainant approached the incharge of e-Disha who requested Mr.Gaurav to do needful and asked the complainant to go to the office of OP but to no avail. Then the complainant visited the office of SDM, Panchkula and there Smt.Mamta Sharma told her that she would take matter up with DC, Panchkula in meeting but to no avail. The complainant also tried to meet DC, Panchkula but nothing has happened. Then the complainant sent a mail to RTA at Haryana Govt. Secretariat in Chandigarh also but in vain. As per policy of the authorities, the Op is under obligation to issue and install the High Security Number Plate on vehicles within 4 days of receiving payment failing which they are liable to pay penalty to customer at Rs.50/- per day for the first 7 days and thereafter at Rs.75/- per day. This act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service on its part. Hence, this complaint.
2. Notice was issued to the Op through registered post. But none has appeared on behalf of the Op, it is deemed to be served. The Op was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 21.06.2016.
3. The authorized representative for the complainant has tendered the evidence by way of affidavit Annexure C-A alongwith documents Annexure C-1 to C-8 and closed the evidence.
4. We have heard authorized representative for the complainant and have also perused the record.
5. It is evident that the complainant had deposited fee of Rs.730/- qua high security plate for her two vehicles No.HR-03-H-6258 and HR-03N-6832 with OP on 09.04.2015 as is evident through Annexure C-1. The grievance of the complainant is that the complainant had visited the office of Op, requested the office of DC, Panchkula and SDM, Panchkula many times for affixing the high security registration plate on her vehicles but no action was taken by the OP then he approached this Forum to redress her grievance by way of filing the present complaint on 12.05.2016. As per notice on notice board (Annexure C-3) which provides that “M/s Link Utsav is under obligation to install the High Security Number Plates on vehicles within four day of receiving payment. Thereafter, they are liable to pay penalty to the customer at the rate of Rs.50/- per day for the first 7 days and thereafter Rs.75/- per day”. The complainant also sent a mail to RTA at Haryana Govt. Secretariat in Chandigarh which remained silent. The complainant has also filed her duly sworn affidavit (Annexure C-A).
6. Moreover, the Op did not appear to contest the claim of the complainant and preferred to proceed against ex-parte, which draws an adverse inference against it. The non-appearance of the Op despite notice shows that it has nothing to say in its defence or against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions made by the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted. As such, the same are accepted as correct and deficiency in service on the part of the Op is proved.
7. In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the present complaint deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed. The Ops are directed as under:-

(i)      To pay Rs.350/- (Rs.50/- per day for 7 days after 4 working days and thereafter Rs.75/- per day till issuance of High Security Plates).

(ii)     To pay an amount of Rs.2000/- as compensation for mental agony, harassment and cost of litigation.

                 Let the order be complied with within the period of 30 days from the receipt of certified copy of this order. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

11.08.2016         S.P.ATTRI        ANITA KAPOOR        DHARAM PAL

                             MEMBER       MEMBER                     PRESIDENT

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.                

 

                                                         DHARAM PAL

                                                          PRESIDENT