Order no.2 Date:04.09.2023
Ld. Advocate for the complainant is present.
Ld. Advocate for the opposite party nos.1 & 2/petitioners is present.
The Misc. Application dated 24.07.2023 filed by opposite party nos.1 & 2/petitioners is taken up for hearing. No written objection has been filed by the complainant.
Perused. Considered. Heard both side.
Ld. Advocate for the opposite party nos.1 & 2/petitioners submit that the opposite party nos.1 & 2 are not necessary parties to this case. According to him there is no claim or allegation made by the complainant against opposite party nos.1 & 2. Therefore, the names of opposite party nos.1 & 2 is liable to be expunged from the cause title of CC/88/2023.
In reply, Ld. Advocate for the complainant raised strong objection against the prayer of the opposite party nos.1 & 2/petitioners.
Ld. Advocate for the complainant submits that opposite party nos.1 & 2 are necessary parties to the case and their presence is very much required for passing effective and executable judgment in CC/88/2023.
On scrutiny of the record it appears that the complainant due to extreme financial crisis decided to sale his vehicle bearing no.WB03D1251, Chassis no.MAT457403E7H13470, Engine no.497TC92HVY829134, Model no.TATA 1109 to opposite party no.3 for a sum of Rs.6,45,000/- (Rupees six lakh forty five thousand) only. The opposite party no.3 paid a sum of Rs.55,000/- (Rupees fifty five thousand) only to the complainant towards part consideration amount of the vehicle and for the rest payment opposite party no.3 after completion of necessary formalities obtained loan from opposite party nos.1 & 2 to the tune of Rs.5,90,000/- (Rupees five lakh ninety thousand) only. Opposite party nos.1 & 2 issued a consent letter dated 21.05.2022 with regard to vehicle no.WB03D1251 in favour of opposite party no.3 and sent a copy to the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant was paid a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakh) only and the balance amount of Rs.1,90,000/- (Rupees one lakh ninety thousand) only remained unpaid to the complainant. The complainant further stated that in compliance of the part performance of the contract, he delivered possession of the vehicle and also handed over all original documents in connection with said vehicle to the opposite party no.3. Thereafter, the complainant on several occasions approached to the opposite party nos.1 & 2 and requested them to complete the process of execution of hypothecation/hire purchase agreement after getting the vehicle registered with the concern RTO in the name of Amar Kumar after making payment of balance consideration amount but till date none of the opposite parties pay any heed to it. It is alleged by the complainant that the opposite party no.3 taking advantage of physical possession of the vehicle randomly indulged in transportation of unauthorized and smuggled goods. The said vehicle is yet to be transferred in the name of the opposite party no.3. According to the complainant the opposite parties have rendered deficient services by not completing the process of execution of hypothecation/hire purchase agreement after getting the vehicle registered with the concern RTO in the name of opposite party no.3 after making payment of balance consideration amount of the vehicle which act endorsed unauthorised use of the aforesaid vehicle by the opposite party no.3. Thereafter the complainant prays for an order directing the opposite party nos.1 & 2 to complete the process of execution of Hypothecation/Hire Purchase Agreement after getting the vehicle registered with the concern RTO in the name of the opposite party no.3 and/or inter alia on other reliefs against the opposite parties.
It further appears from the record of CC/88/2023 that opposite party nos.1 & 2 appeared in the case and filed written version on 24.07.2023 and the case has been fixed for filing affidavit in chief by the complainant.
In course of hearing of the Misc. Application, Ld. Advocate for the opposite party nos.1 & 2 has admitted that the total amount of the loan has not been disbursed yet. It has not been denied by the opposite party nos.1 & 2 that the said vehicle is in possession of opposite party no.3 and/or till date the name of the complainant as registered owner of the said vehicle has not been changed. Moreover, reliefs have been claimed by the complainant against opposite party no.1 & 2 also which can only be decided by the touch stone of evidence of the parties.
Considering the facts mentioned in the complaint application and the prayer of the complainant, we are of the opinion that opposite party nos.1 & 2 are necessary parties to the case. In their absence no effective judgment can be passed by the Commission. Moreover, as written version has already been filed by the opposite party nos.1 & 2, the dispute between the parties shall be decided on the basis of evidence of both sides.
Having considered the discussion made above we find that the Misc. Application dated 24.07.2023 is devoid of any merit and liable to be dismissed.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
that the Misc. Application dated 24.07.2023 be and the same is dismissed on contest with cost of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand) only.
