Punjab

Moga

CC/17/14

Sukhwinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managaer, Godawari Motors Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Kanwal Hanspal Singh

03 May 2017

ORDER

THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MOGA.

 

 

                                                                                                CC No. 14 of 2017

                                                                                                Instituted on: 20.01.2017

                                                                                               Decided on: 03.05.2017

 

Sukhwinder Singh s/o Sh. Hardev Singh V.P.O. Bhathlan, District Barnala.

 

……… Complainant

 

Versus

The Manager, Godawari Motors Pvt. Ltd. opposite Focal Point, Ferozepur Road, Moga.  

 

                                                                           ……….. Opposite Party

 

 

Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

 

Quorum:    Sh. Ajit Aggarwal,  President

                   Smt. Bhupinder Kaur, Member

 

Present:       Sh. Kanwar Hanspal Singh, Advocate Cl. for complainant.

                   Sh. Sidharth Chandi, 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 Manager, Godawari Motors Pvt. Ltd. opposite Focal Point, Ferozepur Road, Moga (hereinafter referred to as the opposite party) directing them to refund Rs.8200/- to the complainant received by them illegally, forcibly from the complainant on 27.11.2014 as more registration fee alongwith interest. Further they may be directed to pay Rs.90,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, harassment and emotional distress suffered by complainant alongwith litigation expenses to the complainant and other relief which this Forum deems just and proper be granted.

2.                Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the complainant purchased a Hyundai Grand I 10 Magna 1.2 car from opposite party on 04.09.2014 worth Rs.4,91,000/-. The complainant paid Rs.2,32,600/- to opposite party and get the car in his possession and remaining amount was to be paid in installments. On 04.09.2014 when the complainant finalized the dealing with opposite party in respect of said car, the tax fee/registration fee for the said vehicle was 6% and opposite party had taken the said 6% amount as registration fee from the complainant in the payment of Rs.2,32,600/- on 04.09.2014 and at that time opposite party assured the complainant that they will at his earliest possibility apply for the registration of the said vehicle/car. The opposite party did not care and not paid intention regarding applying for the registration of the vehicle of the complainant. When the complainant asked the opposite party for the registration certificate then the complainant shocked to know that opposite party has not still applied for RC and the opposite party asked the complainant to deposit Rs.8200/- more to get register the vehicle purchased by the complainant and also asked the complainant that the registration fee has been increased, therefore, the complainant has to pay Rs.8200/- more, if he want to get registration certificate of his car otherwise that amount paid by the complainant as 6% for Rs.4,91,000/- purchased amount shall also be kept with the opposite party and they will not given back the said 6% amount to complainant. Due to dictatorship behaviour of the opposite party, the complainant has to deposit Rs.8200/- more on 27.11.2014 with opposite party. If the registration fee had been increased even then the complainant was not responsible for the same, because when the complainant had already deposited the legally payable registration fee with the opposite party, then the opposite party has to apply for registration within time, but they failed to do so. Due to the act and conduct of opposite party, the complainant has suffered unnecessary harassment, mental tension and agony. Hence this complaint.

3.                Upon notice, opposite party appeared through counsel and filed written reply taking certain preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable in the present form; that the complainant has got no locus standi to file the present complaint, as the complainant himself is at fault in depositing the increased 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; that the complaint of the complainant is not verified as per law as such, liable to be rejected; that as per allegations of complainant he had deposited the excess amount in 2014, but till the date of filling the present case, he did not send any letter, e-mail or visit the office of opposite party to refund the alleged excess amount neither he explain the reason in complaint that why he remained silent for more than 2.5 year. Nothing excess was received from the complainant. On merits, it is admitted correct that the complainant had purchased a Hyundai Grand i10 MAGNA 1.2 car worth Rs.4,91,000/- from opposite party on 04.09.2014. The complainant had paid Rs.2,32,600/- to opposite party and get the car in his possession from them. On 04.09.2014 when the complainant finalized the dealing with opposite party in respect of said car, the tax fee/registration fee for the said vehicle was 6% and opposite party had taken the said 6% amount as registration fee from the complainant in the payment of Rs.2,32,600/- on 04.09.2014 and at that time opposite party has assured the complainant that he will at the earliest possibility apply for the registration of the said vehicle/car purchased by the complainant. The complainant himself stopped the opposite party to apply the registration of vehicle as he had not arrangement for payment of registration fee and he was also willing to get the registration number of his own choice. All other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint with cost has been made.

4.                In order to prove the case, complainant tendered in evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex. C-1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-9 and closed the evidence. 

5.                On the other hand, opposite party tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh.Amit Passi, Account Manager of M/s Godawri Motors Pvt. Ltd. Ex.OP-1 and copy of resolution Ex.OP-2 and closed the evidence.

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

7.                The case of the complainant is that on 04.09.2014 he purchased a car from opposite party and deposited Rs.2,32,600/- with them and the remaining amount was to be paid in installments. The complainant also deposited requisite tax fee and registration charges of the vehicle with opposite party. As per rules registration of the vehicle was to be done by opposite party. The opposite party assured the complainant that they will apply for the registration of vehicle as early as possible, but they did not care and did not pay any intention for applying of registration of the vehicle. When complainant approached opposite party to get his registration certificate, the opposite party demanded Rs.8200/- more as registration charges by stating that the State Government had enhanced the registration charges from 6% to 8 % w.e.f. 8.10.2014. Due to negligence and deficiency in service of opposite party, the complainant had not get the registration certificate of the vehicle in time, despite visiting to opposite party a number of times. In the compelling circumstances, the complainant paid Rs.8200/- more to opposite party, as registration charges, otherwise they refused to hand over the registration certificate of the vehicle to the complainant. The complainant issued legal notice to opposite party demanding refund of Rs.8200/- received by them  as enhanced registration fee. To prove his case, complainant has produced on record copy of receipt dated 27.11.2014 vide which he paid Rs.8200/- more towards registration charges, copy of same is Ex.C-3. He also produced copy of legal notice dated 17.01.2015 as Ex.C-2.

8.                On the other hand, opposite party admitted that the complainant purchased a car from them on 04.09.2014. They further admitted that at that time, the complainant deposited requisite tax and fee for the registration of the vehicle. They denied that they ever promised to complainant for applying registration certificate as early as possible. They argued that the complainant himself stopped them to apply registration of vehicle, as he was willing to get registration number of his own choice. They argued that there was no delay on their part in applying for registration certificate. They admitted that on 08.10.2014, the Punjab Government enhanced registration charges of the vehicles from 6% to 8%. The complainant at his own paid the enhanced registration fee to opposite party. If there is any delay in applying for the registration, it is only on the part of complainant. So, he cannot claim refund of Rs.8200/- paid by him more as registration charges. He filed this false and frivolous complaint.

9.                We have thoroughly gone through the file, evidence and arguments lead by ld. counsel for the parties and observed that it is admitted case of the parties that the complainant purchased a car from opposite party on 04.09.2014 and paid the requisite registration fee to opposite party. But the opposite party did not apply for the registration of the vehicle and did not deposit the registration fee with District Transport Office on time and deposited the fee with DTO only on 16.10.2014, which is proved from the document Ex.C-7, which is a receipt regarding deposit of registration fee by opposite party. In the meantime the Government of Punjab enhanced the registration fee of the vehicles from 6% to 8%. To prove his case, the complainant produced copy of receipt regarding deposit of registration fee by opposite party to Transport Department as Ex.C-7 and receipt of Rs.8200/- paid by him to opposite party towards enhanced registration fee as Ex.C-3. The version of the complainant is also supported by the legal notice issued by him to opposite party demanding Rs.8200/- illegally received by them. From all these documents, the case of the complainant is fully proved. On the other hand, the version of the opposite party that the complainant himself stopped the opposite party for applying registration of vehicle is not proved, as they did not produce any evidence to prove their pleadings except only the affidavit of Sh.Amit Passi, Account Manager Ex.OP-1. There is no cogent evidence to justify the position of opposite party.

10.              From the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that it is negligence of opposite party for non applying for the registration of the vehicle on time with Transport Department. The complainant is not supposed to suffer any kind of harassment or financial loss due to the negligence of opposite party, as the complainant already paid requisite fee for registration of the vehicle and it was sole responsibility of opposite party to apply for registration certificate in time, but they failed to do so. So, the opposite party is liable to pay enhanced registration fee. In view of the above observation and keeping in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we are fully convinced with the arguments and evidence lead by complainant. Hence, the present complaint in hand is hereby allowed with direction to opposite party to refund Rs.8200/- deposited by complainant with them as enhance registration fee with interest @ 9% p.a. from 27.11.2014, till final realization. Opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.3000/-(Three thousand only) as compensation for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and Rs.2000/-(Two thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. Compliance of the order be made within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, complainant shall be entitled to initiate proceedings against opposite party under section 25 & 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be sent to parties, free of costs. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 03.05.2017

                                                  (Bupinder Kaur)                       (Ajit Aggarwal)

                                                         Member                                   President

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.