Haryana

Karnal

CC/231/2015

Amit Kumar S/o Rajbir Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Malwa Automobile Pvt. Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Rahiv Gupta

06 Apr 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No.231 of 2015

                                                         Date of instt. 28.09.2015

                                                         Date of decision:06.04.2018

 

Amit Kumar  son of Shri Rajbir Singh, resident of village Garhi Birbal, Tehsil Indri, District Karnal.

                                                                                               

                                                                        …….Complainant.      

                                        Versus

 

M/s Malwa Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. # 119/4 K.M.Stone, G.T. Road, Karnal-132001, through its MD/CEO/Authorized Signatory.

                                         

                                                                     …..Opposite Party.

 

           Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.            

 

Before   Sh. Jagmal Singh……President.

              Sh. Anil Sharma……….Member

             

 

 Present  Shri  Balraj Sangwan Advocate for complainant.

               Shri   Sandeep Khokkar Adv. for opposite party.

               

 

ORDER:                    

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 on the averments that on 28.5.2015 he purchased Tata Zest XM QJT 90PS, Venetian Red colour car bearing chasis no.MAT624026ELH16679, Engine no.101A2000-0516419, Model 2014 from OP by paying total consideration of Rs.6,63,800/- including VAT/CST Taxes vide valid Sale Invoice no.MAPL/KNL-2015-16-0104 dated 28.4.2015. OP issued a Temporary registration no.HR-99-RX-TP-2273, validity of which was upto one month i.e. 27.5.2015. He purchased the said car through Hypothecation Agreement with ICICI Bank Ltd. Karnal. As per law and rules to expiry of validity of temporary registration certificate the OP was bound to provide Form-20 to the concerned Registering Authority (MV) Indri, District Karnal, he applied for the registration of the abovesaid vehicle, but OP has not provided the same even after expiry of 30 days period and on account of such reasons he becomes unable to apply for registration of his vehicle. He made repeatedly requests to the OP in that regard then OP has sent Forum 20 in the office of Registering Authority (MV) Indri. Thereafter, he applied for registration of the vehicle on the same day i.e. 24.6.2015 by depositing all necessary fees etc. to the tune of Rs.61,790/-. But the Registering Authority has compelled to deposit extra amount of fine and extended road tax Rs.20,456/- due to late submission of file for registration of the vehicle. Due to this act and conduct of OP he suffered loss of Rs.20,456/-. He demanded the said amount from the OPs but OP refused to pay the same. In this way there was deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence complainant filed the present complaint.

2.             Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who appeared and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; locus standi and cause of action; has not come to this Forum with clean hands and has suppressed the true and material facts; bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of parties and jurisdiction. On merits, it has been submitted that The OP has already issued the Form 20 to the complainant in time but the complainant himself did not apply for registration of the same knowingly and willfully. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4 and closed the evidence on 17.8.2016.

4.             On the other hand, OP tendered into evidence affidavit Mukesh Kumar Ex.OPW1/A and document OP-1 and closed the evidence on 22.5.2017.

5.             We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

6.             The case of the complainant is that on 28.4.2015, the complainant purchased a Tata Zest XM QJT 90PS, Venetian Red colour car bearing chasis no.MAT624026ELH16679, Engine no.101A2000-0516419, Model 2014 from OP. The said vehicle was purchased through Hypothecation Agreement with ICICI Bank Ltd. Karnal. The Temporary Registration number was HR-99-RX-TP-2273. It is further alleged by the complainant that as per prevailing law and rules, prior to expiry of validity of the temporary registration number, the OP was bound to provide online Form no.20 to the concerned Registering Authority i.e. Registering Authority (MV) Indri, District Karnal. But the OP has not provided the same within the stipulated period of 30 days and only sent the same online on 24.6.2015 to the above authority and thereafter the complainant could apply for the registration on the same day i.e. on 24.6.2015. It is further alleged that due to late submission of the Form 20 by the OP, the complainant was burden to deposit necessary fee etc. to the tune of Rs.20,456/- in excess, which includes late fee of Rs.7200/-, extended road tax Rs.13,256/-. It is further alleged that if the OP submit the Form no.20 online within stipulated period of 30 days, then there was no need to deposit the late fee and extended road tax which was imposed upon the complainant due to fault of the OP. Hence the OP was deficient in providing services to the complainant.

7.             On the other hand, the OP contended that the Form  no.20 has already been issued to the complainant in time but the complainant himself did not apply for registration of the same knowingly and willfully. So there was no fault on the part of the OP.

8.            It is pertinent to mention here that this Forum has written a letter to the Registering Authority (MV) Karnal to know that when the Form no.20 was started to be provided online by the dealer. The Registering Authority Karnal vide no.4182/MRC dated 21.3.2018 informed this Forum that Form no.20 was started to be provided online by the dealer from 4.2.2013 and in this regard  copy of letter no.1470 to 1472 dated 4.12.2013 written by the Principal Secretary to Government Haryana, Transport Department to the Transport Commissioner, Haryana, Chandigarh has been attached with the above letter dated 21.3.2018. The clause 4.4 of letter dated 4.12.2013 states that “The dealer shall ensure that they are sending online application Form no.20 to the concerned registering authority only and not to any other registering authority Adequate care must be taken by the dealer to avoid any complications in registration.”  From this letter it is clear that providing of Form no.20 online was started vide above letter dated 4.12.2013. In the present case the complainant has purchased the vehicle on 28.4.2015, therefore, the contention of OP that they have issued Form no.20 to the complainant is totally wrong and has no force. If it is presumed that the OP has issued the Form no.20 to the complainant, then it was the duty of the OP to provide cogent evidence with regard to the fact that the Form no.20 was issued to the complainant but the OP has not produced any such evidence on the file. If the form no.20 was started to be provided online, even then it was for the OP to prove that when the Form no.20 was provided online to the Registering Authority (MV) Indri. The OP has failed to produce such evidence also.  It is pertinent to mention here that complainant has produced on the file an information received from Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil) Indri under RTI Act that for the Registration of the new vehicle, Form no.20 was generated online by the dealer. From this it is clear that the same was to be generated by the OP but the OP has not proved on the file when they have generated the Form 20 with the Registering Authority (MV) Indri in the present case. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the OP has failed to prove that he had issued Form 20 to the complainant or that the OP had generated the same with Registering Authority (MV) Indri before 24.6.2015.. Hence the OP was deficient in providing services to the complainant.

9.             In view of above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the OP to pay Rs.20,456/- to the complainant. We further direct the OP to pay Rs.2200/- on account of mental pain, agony, and harassment. This order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order failing which complainant is entitled for the interest @ 8% per annum from the date of order till its realization. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:6.4.2018

                                                                       

                                                                  President,

                                                          District Consumer Disputes

                                                           Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 

 

                     (Anil Sharma)

                        Member