BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

                              ========                  

Gurpreet Singh s/o S.Santokh Singh, r/o #1559, Sector 49-B, Pushpac Society, Chandigarh.

…..Complainant

                           V E R S U S

1.  KLG Hyundai, Ashwani Automobiles Pvt. Ltd., 181/3-B, Industrial Area, Phase I, Chandigarh.

2.  The Registering and Licensing Authority, Sector 17, Chandigarh.

3.  Hyundai Motor India Ltd. Plot No. H-1, SIPCOT Industrial Park, Irrugattukottai, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram Distt. Tamilnadu.

4.  Chandigarh Adminsitration, through its Home Secretary, U.T., Chandigarh.

5.  Home Secretary-cum-Chairman State Transport Authority, U.T. Chandigarh.

                                  ……Opposite Parties

CORAM:  SH.JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL PRESIDENT

              DR.(MRS) MADHU BEHL       MEMBER

              SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL    MEMBER

Argued by: Sh. Sandeep Bhardwaj, Adv. for complainant.

Sh. S.R.Bansal, Adv. for OP No.1.

Mrs. Pratima Arora, Govt.Pleader for OP No.2,4 & 5.

Sh. Ravinder Singh, Adv. for OP No.3

PER SHRI JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, PRESIDENT

             Succinctly put, the complainant purchased Accent Hyundai car from OP-1 on 27.07.09 on payment of Rs.5,22,400/- and got Temporary Certificate of  Registration valid upto 26.08.09. The complainant after completing the entire formalities submitted the file to the Registering Authority(OP-2) on 5.08.09, for registration of his vehicle. The complainant stated that OP-2 refused to register the vehicle on the plea that some document is required to be deposited by OP-1 to get his car registered as LPG car in the city.  The complainant immediately approached OP-1 and asked him to supply the required document so that the same can be submitted to OP-2 before the expiry of the Temporary Registration.  The complainant alleged that despite repeated visits and requests, OP-1 did not supply the required document to OP-2 and in this process the last date of Temporary Registration number expired. The complainant stated that he again approached OP-1 for the said document but inspite of supplying the document OP-1 indulged himself in unfair trade practice by extending the date of expiry of certificate of Temporary Registration upto 3.09.09. When the complainant requested OP-2 to accept the extended date of Temporary Registration number, OP-2 refused to do so and stated that OP-1 has no authority to extend the date of Temporary Registration number. On the request of the complainant, OP-2 gave in writing on 11.09.09, that they have not received the approval of the Home Secretary-cum-Chairman, State Transport Authority, U.T., Chandigarh, for registration of the said vehicle. Hence this complaint alleging that the aforesaid acts of the OP-1 amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice due to which the complainant is unable to use his new car in the absence of Certificate of Registration. The complainant has prayed to allow his complaint and OP-1 be directed to get his car registered by producing the said document and has further prayed for compensation from OP-1 towards mental agony and harassment alongwith costs of litigation.

2.             In the written reply OP-1 admitted the factual matrix of the case and stated that the complainant has not made manufacturer as necessary party, which was within the knowledge of the complainant and further stated that dealer-OP-1 cannot be held liable due to the negligence and carelessness of the manufacturer. OP-1 further stated that OP-2 is fully empowered and competent to get the vehicle registered and the complainant has not gone to OP-2 with requisite documents on 13.10.2009, when the date of appearance was fixed by Ld.Forum to visit the office of RTA-Chandigarh(OP-2), to get the registration. Hence, denying all the material allegations of the complainant and pleaded that there has been no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

3.             In the written reply OP-2 stated that there is no provision under the Motor Vehicle Act for extension of Temporary Certificate of Registration. OP-2 further stated that whenever any new model is launched by the company, the approval of the same is taken by manufacturer company in U.T., Chandigarh from Home Secretary, Chandigarh Administration through State Transport Authority (STA), Chandigarh and the said STA refers the case to the Home Secretary-cum-Secretary Transport, Chandigarh Administration for its approval and after the approval, the same is supplied to RLA Office by the STA.  OP-2 stated that, on the personal visits of the complainant, it was duly informed to him that his vehicle would be registered in Chandigarh only after the receipt of the approval from the Office of State Home Secretary-cum-Chairman, State Transport Authority-cum Secretary Transport, U.T., Chandigarh. OP-2 further stated that the said approval from the Office of STA was received by RLA Office-OP-2 on 30.09.09 and the RC No. CH-04-K-3030 was issued to the complaint on 07.10.09. OP-2 admitted to the extent of non-registration of vehicle only because of absence of approval from Home Secretary. It is further stated by OP-2 that the complainant has leveled allegation of deficiency in service only against OP-1, therefore OP-2 has prayed for dismissal of  the present complaint against them.

4.             In the written reply OP No. 3 submitted that they had no role to play in getting the car of the complainant registered with the concerned authorities.  They being the manufacturer of the car, its obligations were limited to fulfilling the warranty obligations alone. They manufacture vehicles only after obtaining/obeying the necessary licence/permission/approval from the concerned authorities. There was absolutely no defect in the complainant’s car.  The aspect of retail sale of the car was strictly interse the complainant and the OP-1.  They deal with all its dealers on principal to principal basis. They were never at fault in supply of any document of the said car to the complainant or to any other authority. They had been unnecessarily impleaded as a party to the present proceedings and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint against them.

5.             On the other hand the OP No. 4 and OP No.5 submitted that the vehicle in question sold by the company or its representative had to obtain approval before selling it in Chandigarh.  In the present case M/s Hyundai Motor India Ltd. DLF Tower-B, 3^rd Floor, Rajeev Gandhi Technology Park, Chandigarh had applied to the State Transport Authority for approval of the Model of Accent Executive Eco on 25.08.2009 and the vehicle was physically inspected on 17.09.2009, and the case was then sent on 22.09.2009 to Home Secretary, Chandigarh Administration for approval which was received back on 23.09.2009.  On 29.09.2009 the approval of the model was conveyed to M/s Hyundai Motor India Ltd. DLF Tower-B, 3^rd Floor, Rajeev Gandhi Technology Park, Chandigarh and to the Registering & Licencing Authority, UT Chandigarh. Hence, the delay was on the part of OP No.1 and OP No.3 who had applied through its representative on 25.08.2009 but the vehicle was sold to the complainant on 27.07.2009. OP No.4 and OP No. 5 prayed for dismissal of the complaint against.

6.             Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

7.             We have heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

8.             The complainant had purchased the vehicle on 27.07.2009 and applied for a certificate of registration.  The certificate was issued to him on 7.10.2009. During this period the complainant had a temporary registration certificate which was issued to him on 4.08.2009, valid upto 3.09.2009.  The complainant could very well ply the vehicle on the basis of the temporary registration certificate copy of which is Annexure C-5. We therefore do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.  The complaint is accordingly dismissed.

              Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge.  The file be consigned.