Sarwan Singh filed a consumer case on 16 Oct 2019 against Managing Director C.M. Auto Sales Pvt. Ltd. in the Rupnagar Consumer Court. The case no is CC/19/76 and the judgment uploaded on 05 Nov 2019.
BEFORE THE DISTT. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ROPAR
Consumer Complaint No. : 76 of 16.07.2019
Date of decision : 16.10.2019
Sarwan Singh, son of Cahran Dass, resident of Village Bajpur, Tehsil Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar.
......Complainant
Versus
1. Managing Director, CM Auto Sales Pvt. Limited, authorized dealer of Maruti Suzuki, NH 21, Rangilpur, Chandigarh Road, Rupnagar, Tehsil & District Rupnagar
2. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, Head Office: 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kund, New Delhi-110070, India
...Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
QUORUM
SH. KARNAIL SINGH AHHI, PRESIDENT
CAPT. YUVINDER SINGH MATTA, MEMBER
ARGUED BY
Sh. Pawan Kumar Saini, Adv. counsel for complainant
Sh. Pardeep Mittal, Adv. counsel for O.P. No.1
ORDER
SH. KARNAIL SINGH AHHI, PRESIDENT
1. Sarwan Singh, son of Cahran Dass, resident of Village Bajpur, Tehsil Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar, has filed the present complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties to deliver/hand over the registration certificate of the vehicle in question; to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation; any other relief which this Hon'ble Forum may deems fit be granted to the complainant, in the interest of justice.
2. Brief facts made out from the complaint are that on 01.11.2018, the complainant had purchased New Maruti Vitara Brezza ZDI from the O.P. No.1 with one year warranty, which was extended upto three years. Thereafter, on 13.11.2018, the O.P. No.1 had called the complainant to the O.Ps. Agency and had paid entire amount of New Vitara Brezza car including registration charges, insurance charges etc and the O.Ps. officials have also told him that their company would prepare all the documents i.e. insurance, registration certificate etc. But till today, the O.Ps. did not hand over the registration certificate of the vehicle in question. Hence, this complaint.
3. On being put to the notice, the O.P. No.1 appeared through his counsel and filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form; that the answering O.P. has been unnecessarily dragged in this complaint; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the answering O.P.; that the complainant has concealed the material facts from this Forum. On merits, it is stated that the complainant has already received the Registration Certificate of car bearing No.PB-16-E-5658 from the answering O.P. on 22.5.2019 and copy of Registration Certificate having signatures of complainant in token of receipt of RC. After purchase of the car, the complainant was to apply for High Security Registration Plate (HSRP) number plate and after fitting of the HSRP number plate the registration certificate was to be issued by the Registering Authority. The complainant had applied for HSRP number plate in the month of April, 2019 and after fitting of HSRP number plate on the car, the Registration Certificate was prepared by the Registering Authority which was delivered to the complainant on 22.5.2019. Rest of the allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint.
4. On being put to the notice, the O.P. No.2 appeared and filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that the complainant is not a consumer as defined under Section 2(1) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986; that the present complaint is bad for mis-joinder of parties; that the answering O.P. does not sell its products to any individual under its invoice or sale certificate; that the present complaint is frivolous and vexatious and is liable to be dismissed. On merits, it is stated that no transaction of any kind had taken place between the complainant and the answering O.P. The answering O.P. does not sell its cars to any individual under its invoice or sale certificate. This O.P. sells its products to its authorized dealers and the relationship between the answering O.P. and the dealer is that of Principal to Principal basis only as per the dealership agreement executed between the O.Ps. It is further stated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering O.P. Rest of the allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint.
5. On being called upon to do so, the learned counsel for the complainant has tendered his duly sworn affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A along with the documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C16 and closed the evidence. The learned counsel for the O.P. No.1 has tendered duly sworn affidavit of Sh. Rajesh Mahajan, MD Of O.P. No.1 Ex.OP1/A along with copy of receiving of RC Ex.OP1/B and closed the evidence. The O.P. No.2 had also tendered the sworn affidavit of Sh. Harish Kumar, Assistant Manager with Maruti Suzuki India Limited Ex.OP2/B along with document dealership agreement Ex.OP2/B and closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the file, carefully.
6. The complainant counsel Sh. Pawan Kumar Saini, argued that Sarwan Singh (complainant) had purchased new Maruti Vitara Brezza, ZDI. On 13.11.2018 the complainant made the entire payment including the charges of the Registration Certificate and Insurance Policy. Despite payment of Road Tax, till today the O.Ps. did not supply the Registration Certificate. He also made prayer that it is a consumer dispute, complaint is maintainable, deficiency is made out and the complaint be allowed with costs with the directions to the O.Ps to supply the Registration Certificate.
7. Sh. Pardeep Mittal, counsel for O.P. No.1 argued that admittedly, the complainant purchased the vehicle on 13.11.2018, from whom beside the price of the vehicle O.P. No.1 also received an amount for Road Tax/Registration Certificate. After purchase of the vehicle road tax was increased that was deposited late by the complainant and then in the month of March i.e. 15/3/2019 applied for fixation of the HSRP number plate then Registration Certificate was issued on 09.04.2019 and finally complainant received the Registration Certificate from the O.P. No.1 on 22.5.2019. Copy of which is Ex.OP1/B. The present complaint was filed on 27.05.2019 and complaint was signed on 23.5.2019. In this way, prior to filing the present complaint, complainant received RC and if there was delay then that was no ground for the complainant who applied late for HSRP number plate. Moreso, the grievance of the complainant is seeking directions for the delivery of the Registration Certificate, which stand already received and is admitted by the complainant. So, the complaint has become infructuous and the same be dismissed with cost.
8. Complainant purchased the vehicle on 1.11.2018 and O.P. No.1 sold the same against the payment. These are the admitted facts between the parties. It is also admitted that O.P. No.1 received the Registration Certificate charges and now complainant made prayer seeking directions. So, it is a consumer dispute and the complaint is maintainable.
9. Coming to the real controversy, whether the complainant has been able to prove deficiency in service on the part of O.Ps. or not. O.P. No.1 in detailed reply taken the stand that Registration Certificate of the car bearing No.PB-16-E-5658 was prepared by the Registering Authority and after registering the original Registration Certificate was received by the complainant from the O.P. No.1 on 22.5.2019. The relevant portion of the relief clause is incorporated as under:-
"It is, therefore, prayed that the O.Ps. may kindly be directed to deliver/hand over the Registration Certificate of the vehicle in question and the O.Ps. also directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as a compensation of physical, mental as well as financial harassment on account of his illegal and any other relief which this Hon'ble court may deems fit be granted to the complainant, in the interest of justice".
10. Complainant placed on file various documents that are Ex.C1 to Ex.C16 beside the sworn affidavit. No doubt, sale certificate, insurance, sale certificate and the delivery voucher are the admitted facts. Complainant purchased the vehicle in the capacity Ex. service man. Complainant did not place on file, copy of the Registration Certificate but O.P. No.1 placed on file photocopy of the Registration Certificate Ex.OP1/B and its bottom there is signatures of Sarwan Singh qua the receipt of the Registration Certificate dated 22.5.2019.
11. Today, during the course of arguments, O.P. no.1 placed on file Mark A, registered vehicle detailed (PB-16-E-5658) and HSRP number plate fixation dated 15.3.2019 then Mark B which is smart card detailed and Registration Certificate issued on 9.4.2019. Further also complainant is placed on file Ex.C9 i.e. Provisional Registration Certificate and it was issued on 14.11.2018 then period for the receipt of the RC was extended 31.01.2019, 5.2.2019, 20.2.2019, 30.3.2019 because of the reason of increase in Cess by 1%.
12. Keeping in view of the above referred facts and appreciating the arguments, this forum has come to the conclusion that complainant has failed in proving deficiency on the part of O.Ps. Rather, Sarwan Singh, (complainant) received Registration Certificate on 22.5.2019 then the complainant signed the complaint on 23.5.2019 and filed the present complaint before this Forum on 27.5.2019. So, the complaint is without merit and has become infructuous.
13. The certified copies of this order be supplied to the parties forthwith, free of costs, as permissible under the rules and the file be indexed and consigned to Record Room.
ANNOUNCED (KARNAIL SINGH AHHI)
Dated.16.10.2019 PRESIDENT
(CAPT. YUVINDER SINGH MATTA)
MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.