IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.

             CASE No.  CC/7/2018.

 Date of Filing:                    Date of Admission:                Date of Disposal:

     16.01.18                                      29.01.18                                 11.09.19

Complainant: Md. Safikul Islam

S/o Md. Abdur Razzak

123, Bhakuri Rajbansipara (Masterpara)

PO-Chaltia, PS-Berhampore,

Dist-Murshidabad, Pin-742165

-Vs-

Opposite Party: Managing Director, Dewar’s Garrage Ltd.

4A Council House Street

Kolkata-700001

PS-Lal Bazar

Agent/Advocate for the Complainant            : Sri. A. Zaman.

Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party         : Sri. Ayan Chowdhury.

                       Present:   Sri Asish  Kumar Senapati………………….......President.                              

                                          Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.

FINAL ORDER

  Asish Kumar Senapati, Presiding Member.

            One Md. Safikul Islam (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against the Managing Director, Dewars Garrage Ltd. (here in after referred to as the OP) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.

   The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-

            The Complainant purchased a pre-owned vehicle Model No. I20 Magna bearing registration No. WB02AD-7205 from the OP at a cost of Rs.3,62,000/- including transfer of ownership and service charges. The Complainant advanced Rs.5,000/- for confirmation of the booking and ultimately, on 23.09.16, he was compelled to pay Rs. 3,62,000/- in place of Rs.3,60,000/-. The Complainant met he OP several times to get the vehicle transferred in his name for plying  the vehicle for his personal use but the OP was reluctant to transfer the vehicle in his name. The Complainant requested the OP to refund the money by taking back the vehicle. Ultimately, the OP issued a letter dated 02.07.17 requesting the Complainant to allow 3 months time for complete the transfer of registration but in spite of lapse of 3 months, the OP did not transfer the vehicle in the name of the Complainant. ultimately,the Complainant issued a Lawyer’s notice dated 10.10.17 requesting the OP either to transfer the vehicle or to refund the amount by taking back the vehicle but the OP did not pay any heed to it in spite of receipt of the notice on 13.10.17. Hence, the Complainant filed the case praying for a  direction upon the OP for refund of Rs.3,62,000/- together with interest @ 15% per annum up to the date of realisation and to pay Rs.50,000/- as consequential damages.

            The OP put appearance and filed written version on 19.03.18 contending that the name of the Complainant had duly been recorded as owner in the records of RTO, Barasat and the OP filed a photocopy of the said certificate of registration before this Forum on 23.02.18 i.e. on the date of appearance of the OP. It is the case of the OP that the OP has no deficiency in service. The OP prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

             On the basis of the above version the following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case :

Points for consideration

1. Isthe Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?

2. Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?

3. Has the OP any deficiency in service, as alleged?

4. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?

Point no.1

The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the Complainant is a consumer as se hired services of the OP for consideration.

The Ld. Advocate for the O.P.  has not argued on this point.

On going through the complaint, written version and other materials on record and on a careful consideration over the submission of both sides, we find that the Complainant is a consumer.

Point No.2

The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and the claimed amount is also within pecuniary limit of the District Forum.

On a careful consideration over the materials on record, we find that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and this Forum has pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

Point Nos.3&4

            The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the Complainant purchased a pre-owned vehicle on payment of consideration amount on 23.09.16 but the OP has failed to transfer the ownership of the vehicle in the name of the Complainant and issued a letter dated 02.07.17 (Annexure-C) requesting the Complainant to give 3 months time for completing the process of transfer. It is urged that the Complainant was compelled to issue a Lawyer’s notice dated 10.10.17 requesting the OP to transfer the vehicle in the name of the Complainant within 10 day from the date of receipt of the notice and the OP  did not pay any heed to it in spite of receipt of the notice on 13.10.17. It is contended that the OP has failed to mention the actual date of transfer of ownership of the vehicle in favour of the Complainant . It is contended that the OP has deficiency in service and the Complainant is entitled to get back the amount paid by him for purchase of the vehicle. He submits that the Complainant is also entitled to get compensation of Rs.50,000/- for consequential damage.

            In reply, the Ld. Advocate for the OP submits that the Complainant purchased a pre-owned vehicle on payment of consideration amount on 23.09.16 but the transfer of ownership could not be completed within a short period. It is urged that the Car has already been transferred in the name of the Complainant and the photocopy of the certificate of registration has been filed on 23.02.18. It is urged that the OP has no deficiency in service and the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case.

            Perused the written version, written complaint, evidence of both sides and documents filed by both sides. Admittedly, the Complainant purchased a pre-owned vehicle from the OP on payment of price including the charges for transfer of ownership. It appears from the letter dated 20.07.17 (Annexure-C) that transfer of ownership of the vehicle had not been completed till 02.07.17. The OP requested the Complainant to allow him 3 months time for complete the process of transfer of ownership but the process of transfer of ownership had not been completed till 10.10.17 as it appears from the letter issued by the Ld. Advocate for Complainant dated 10.10.17. The OP is silent about the date of actual transfer of ownership of the vehicle in the name of the Complainant but a photocopy of certificate of registration of the vehicle was filed on 23.02.18. It can be safely presumed that the transfer of ownership of the vehicle in the name of the Complainant was completed before 23.02.18. Therefore, it is clear that the Complainant purchased the vehicle on 23.09.16 and waited for a long period (more than 1 year) for getting his name transferred as owner of the vehicle. The OP has not given any acceptable reason to establish that the process of transfer of ownership was not completed within a short period due to lapse on the part of the Complainant. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the OP has deficiency in service as the ownership of the Complainant in respect of his purchased vehicle had not been completed within a short period after purchase of his vehicle.

            In our considered opinion, the Complainant is entitled to get compensation of Rs.20,000/- for deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

            The Complainant is also entitled to get Rs.2,000/- as litigation cost against the OP.

Reasons for delay

The Case was filed on 16.01.18 and admitted on 29.01.18 . This Forum tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act,1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.

Fees paid are correct.

In the result the complaint case succeeds. Hence, it is

                                    ORDERED

that the complaint Case No. CC/7/2018 be and the same is hereby allowed on contest against the OP with litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to the Complainant.

                The OP is directed to pay Rs. 20,000/- as compensation for deficiency in service to the Complainant within 60 days from the date of this order.

.                The OP is further directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as litigation cost to the Complainant within 60 days from the date of this order.

Let plain copy of this order  be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand  /by post under proper acknowledgment  as per rules, for information and necessary action.

The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:

    confonet.nic.in

Dictated & corrected by me.

President

  Member                                                                                                   President.