Adv. For the Complainant: - Sri B.C.Pradhan and Others
Adv. For O.P :- Sri B.Barik, Sri B.Mishra
Date of filing of the Case :-29.08.2018
Date of Order :-07.08.2020
ORDER
Sri A.K.Purohit, President
1. The complainant had purchased a TATA TIAGO car Model XZA with the financial assistance of M/S Tata Motors Finance Ltd. After observing all formalities and after receipt of the finance amount from the financer the O.P. delivered the said vehicle to the complainant on dated 19.5.18 without documents. On the request of the complainant the O.P. on dated 22.5.18 supplied 3 no’s of documents which are erroneous. Further the O.Ps. have also not registered the vehicle before the R.T.O although they have received the registration charges amounting to Rs. 52,900/- To this the complainant lodge a complaint before the O.P.4 on dated 25.5.17 which was settled between the parties and according to the said settlement the complainant has to pay Rs.5,91,531/- towards cost of the vehicle, handling charges and towards extended warranty charges and the complainant herself will take care of the insurance and registration of the vehicle. The complainant alleges that due to the unprofessional attitude of the O.P. she was humiliated before the public as she was not able to show the documents by the time of RTO checking on dated 24.5.18 and hence the complainant claims compensation.
2. Although notice has been served on O.P.1 & 2 neither they appears nor they have filed their version and hence they are set expert vide order dated 22.6.20. O.P. 3 & 4 contested the case by filing their written version jointly. According to the O.P.3 & 4 they are the manufacturer of the vehicle and are not involved in the sale process directly and hence there is no privity of contract between the complainant and the answering O.Ps. Hence the O.P.3 & 4 claims no liability and denied all the allegations of the complainant.
3. Heard the complainant. Perused the written version and documentary evidence available on record. It appears from the material available on record that the dispute between the parties have already been settled among themselves and the parties have already been acted as per the settlement as described in para 14 of the complaint petition. The complainant has also admitted that she was supplied with corrected documents and have already taken step for registration of her vehicle. It is the duty of the complainant that she should take the possession of the vehicle with all documents and she should ply the vehicle on road with required documents.
4. Under the aforesaid facts and material available on record it is concluded that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. and hence the complainant is not entitled to compensation.
Accordingly the case of the complainant is dismissed.
Pronounced in the open Forum to-day the 7th day of August’ 2020.
Sd/- Sd/-
(S.Rath) (A.K.Purohit)
MEMBER. PRESIDENT
