BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.            

                                                          Consumer Complaint no. 18 of 2017                                                                           

                                                        Date of Institution         :    27.1.2017

                                                          Date of Decision   :    24.10.2017.

Bhimsain son of Shri Mani Ram, resident of House No.316, Ward No.6, Petrol Pump Kharia, Tehsil Rania, District Sirsa.

                      ……Complainant.

                             Versus.

M/s Garg Motors, authorized dealer of Mahindra & Mahindra, Near Sikanderpur Chowk, Hisar Road, Sirsa, District Sirsa, through its Proprietor/ Manager/ Authorized person.

  ...…Opposite party.

            Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.

Before:        SH. R.L.AHUJA…………………………PRESIDENT

          SMT. RAJNI GOYAT………………….. MEMBER

          SH. MOHINDER PAUL RATHEE …… MEMBER.   

Present:       Sh. Mukesh Godara, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh. Manav Goyal, Advocate for opposite party.

ORDER

                   The case of the complainant in brief is that complainant purchased Jeep Bolero make Mahindra and Mahindra model ZLX Micro Hybrid BS4 on 13.10.2016 from opposite party. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.7,73,858/- to the opposite party and op had issued invoice dated 13.10.2016 in the name of Regional Transport Officer, Sirsa and form no.22 but the op had not issued any other document i.e. bill/ form to the complainant. It is further averred that it is settled policy of the car dealers that at the time of handing over the vehicle, they got issued the temporary number and also used to upload/ update the model with the registering authority through E-Service centre. The op also failed to issue the form no.20 which is necessary document for registration of the vehicle. It is further averred that when the complainant approached to the registration authority for the registration of vehicle in his name, then the registration authority Ellenabad disclosed to the complainant that the documents issued by the op are not complete and the op company has also not updated the model of the car with the registration authority. Thereafter, the complainant approached op and requested to issue the form no.20 in his name and also to generate the model of vehicle with the registration authority but op always lingered on the matter and did not complete the above said formality even despite serving of legal notice dated 30.11.2016. It is further averred that lateron on the further request of complainant, the op issued the above said form to the complainant and the complainant also further requested the op to  pay the late fee of the registration certificate but they failed to redress the grievance of the complainant despite his several visits. Hence, this complaint.

2.                On notice, opposite party appeared and filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that at the time of purchase of the vehicle, the op supplied all required documents regarding sale of the above said vehicle in favour of the complainant and all the concerned documents were handed over to the complainant. The complainant is making totally false and concocted story that op has failed to issue form no.20 as alleged. In fact, this document was supplied on the same date to the complainant with his entire satisfaction. Remaining contents of complaint have also been denied.

3.                The complainant produced his affidavit Ex.CW1, copy of invoice dated 13.10.2016 Ex.C1, copy of form 22 Ex.C2, copy of tax invoice Ex.C3, copy of delivery challan Ex.C4, copy of receipt Ex.C5, copy of certificate of inspection Ex.C6 and copy of form 22 Ex.C7, postal receipt Ex.C8, copy of legal notice Ex.C9, envelope Ex.C10 and acknowledgment Ex.C11 and copy of receipt Ex.C12. On the other hand, op produced affidavit Ex.RW1/A.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.

5.                The perusal of the record reveal that complainant has filed this complaint with the specific allegations that he purchased Bolero vehicle on 13.10.2016 from opposite party for a consideration of Rs.7,73,858/- which was paid in cash to the opposite party and opposite party had issued invoice on the same day but, however, the op had not issued certain documents including form 20 which were necessary for the registration of the vehicle and further more the op has not updated model of the vehicle with the registration authority. The complainant requested the op a number of times to issue the documents and even the legal notice was served but to no effect and as a result of which complainant had to suffer a lot and had to pay Rs.7000/- as late fee for registration of the vehicle and penalty charges. In order to prove his case, complainant has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1 in which he has reiterated all the contents of his complaint. In support, he has also placed on file copy of invoice dated 13.10.2016 Ex.C1, copy of form 22 Ex.C2, copy of tax invoice Ex.C3, copy of delivery challan Ex.C4, copy of receipt Ex.C5, copy of certificate of inspection Ex.C6 and copy of form 22 Ex.C7, postal receipt Ex.C8, copy of legal notice Ex.C9, envelope Ex.C10 and acknowledgment Ex.C11 and copy of receipt Ex.C12. The record further reveal that vehicle was purchased by complainant on 13.10.2016 whereas form 20 to the registering authority was got issued on 2.12.2016 as is evident from copy of form 20 Ex.C7 and registration certificate of the vehicle in question was issued on 5.12.2016. On the other hand, op has furnished affidavit of Sh. Ravinder Goyal Manager as Ex.RW1/A in which he has reiterated all the contents of written statement.

6.                During the course of arguments, learned counsel for opposite party has not denied the fact qua sale of the vehicle by opposite party to the complainant and issuance of sale invoice etc. on 13.10.2016 but, however, he has submitted that all the documents were issued on the same day i.e. on 13.10.2016 at the time of sale of the vehicle but however, the record placed on file by the complainant reveal that the document which was necessary for the registration of the vehicle was supplied by op later on as a result of which the complainant had deposited Rs.7120/- as fine as is evident from receipt Ex.C12. The complainant has claimed Rs.7000/- on account of late fee for registration of the vehicle, Rs.70,000/- for causing financial loss as well as unnecessary harassment and Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses. From the evidence of the complainant, the case of the complainant stands duly proved and it appears that opposite party was deficient in its dealing while issuing documents of the vehicle after issuance of sale invoice.

7.                In view of the above, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.7000/- to the complainant as claimed by the complainant on account of late fee for registration of the vehicle. We further direct the opposite party to further pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as composite compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant. This order should be complied with by the opposite party within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant will be entitled to interest @9% per annum on the total amount of Rs.17,000/- from the date of order till actual payment. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.        

Announced in open Forum.                                                                      President,

Dated:24.10.2017.                          Member                  Member      District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                                       Redressal Forum, Sirsa.