BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.20 of 2015

Date of Instt. 23.01.2015

Date of Decision :27.03.2015

Shivraj Kumar son of Karnail Chand R/o Village Kadiana, P.O.Adampur Doaba District Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

Lovely Autos, Lovely Mall, Dr.Ambedkar Chowk, Jalandhar City through its Incharge/Manager/Authorized Signatory.

.........Opposite party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: S. Jaspal Singh Bhatia (President)

Ms. Jyotsna Thatai (Member)

Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Sh.KC Malhotra Adv., counsel for complainant.

Sh.Arun Gupta Adv., counsel for OP.

Order

J.S Bhatia (President)

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under the Consumer Protection Act against the opposite party on the averments that the complainant booked a car Alto K10 Maruti on 12.9.2014 from opposite party manufactured by Maruti Suzuki Ltd, through its agent Jasbir Singh and also purchased the same for amount of Rs.3,42,896/- on 17.9.2014 and was granted temporary registration number. The complainant deposited/paid all the amount due towards the opposite party before delivery of the said car. The amount for registration certificate Rs.19056/- was paid to opposite party but the opposite party has not deposited the same in the District Transport Office(DTO), Jalandhar for issuing the registration certificate. The opposite also collected Rs.3500/- as logistic charges. At the time of purchase of the car opposite party represented to the complainant that opposite party was authorized to collect the registration charges/road tax etc. After depositing of the said amount, the complainant had been making enquiry regarding status of registration certificate and its delivery from the opposite party. The complainant was put off every time with stock reply that registration certificate will be available shortly and the complainant need not worry on this score. Since the validity period of temporary registration number of the said car was expiring, the complainant approached office of registration authority/DTO to ascertain the status of registration number was awe struck and surprised to learn that opposite party had not deposited the amount fee/charges collected for registration certificate with Registering Authority/DTO within time and kept the same with it. Consequently, on dated 7.10.2014, Punjab Government revised the rate of Road Tax and resultantly opposite party demanded Rs.7000/- over and above the amount of Rs.19056/- already paid so as to enable Registering Authority/DTO, Jalandhar to issue the registration certificate of the said car. On such like averments, the complainant has prayed for directing the opposite party to issue the registration certificate without demanding any further payment from him. He has also claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

2. Upon notice opposite party appeared and filed a written reply pleading that the complainant paid Rs.19,056/- for registration charges of the car. It is pertinent to mention that the complainant wanted a choice number and in order to get the choice number, the complainant has to pay Rs.5000/- for which the complainant agreed to pay the same that is why opposite party could not deposit the registration charges with the Registering Authority. It is correct that complainant deposited Rs.19,056/- towards registration charges and Rs.3500/- as logistic charges. It is submitted that since the complainant failed to deposit Rs.5000/- as extra amount for choice number, as such, the opposite party has not deposited the registration charges in the DTO office. Meanwhile, Punjab Government revised the road tax. The opposite party demanded Rs.7000/- as difference amount, but the complainant refused to pay the difference amount. The opposite party as a goodwill gesture deposited the difference amount and applied for the registration of the car in the office of DTO, Jalandhar. It denied other material averments of the complainant.

3. During the pendency of the present complaint, the opposite party gave the original registration certificate to learned counsel for the complainant before this Forum which was received under protest due to in ordinate delay, subject to relief of compensation and cost of litigation. Counsel for both the parties stated at bar that they are not to lead any evidence.

4. We have carefully gone through the record and also heard the learned counsels for both the parties.

5. So far as certificate of registration is concerned, the complainant has received the same without payment of any extra charges. There is no reliable evidence on record to prove that complainant wanted fancy or choice number. Counsel for the complainant contended that the opposite party was required to deposit the registration charges with the State Government on the same day online but it failed to do so and in the mean time registration charges was increased from 6% to 8% and due to this reason the opposite party started demanding the enhanced charges from the complainant and refused to issue the RC. Notification dated 28.6.2014 issued by Government of Punjab, Department of Transport provides as under:-

That no vehicle which is sold by the dealer and any native of Punjab shall be allowed to be driven/taken out of the showroom unless the temporary registration number is allotted to the vehicle by the dealer after getting the registration fee, HPA fee and the Motor Vehicles Tax(in lump sum) as fixed by the Government from time to time. The Motor Vehicles Tax and fee etc received from the purchaser/owner of the vehicle shall be deposited online system into the State Bank of India under the relevant head on the same day by the dealer.

6. So as per above notification, the dealer is required to deposit the registration charges online into State Bank of India under the relevant head on the same day. Since the opposite party failed to deposit the registration charges on the same day, as such the complainant can not be blamed, if subsequently the State Government has enhanced the registration fee from 6% to 8%. Non depositing of registration charges on the same day as per the above notification, constitute deficiency in service on part of the opposite party.

7. The complainant had to file the present complaint before opposite party delivered certificate of registration. So he is entitled to compensation and litigation expenses.

8. In view of above discussion, the present complaint is accepted and opposite party is directed to give Rs.5000/- in lump sum to the complainant on account of compensation and litigation expenses. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Jyotsna Thatai Jaspal Singh Bhatia

27.03.2015 Member Member President