Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 21.
Instituted on : 12.01.2018.
Decided on : 04.10.2019.
Baljeet Singh son of Sh. Risal R/o village Ferozpur Tehsil Siwan District Kaithal.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- M/s Mohan Tractors Pvt. Ltd. Delhi Road, Rohtak District Rohtak through its partner/prop./owner.
- Ashoka Leyland Co. Marketing Division, 12/5, Mathura Road, Faridabad 121003, Fax 2277647 through its Director/M.D.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.
MS. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Yogesh Sharma, Advocate for the complainant.
Ms. Cheenu Mehta, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that complainant had purchased a truck Ashoka Layland 1616 model 2016 from the opposite party No.1 for a sum of Rs.1181812/- on 31.03.2017 bearing registration no.HR64-3390. That the respondent no.1 has given assurance that the said vehicle is manufactured in the year 2017 and sold on 31.03.2017 while actually the model of the said vehicle is 2016 as mentioned in the R.C. issued by Registration Authority on the basis of sale letters issued by the respondent no.1. That respondent no.1 cheated the complainant by making forgery on the sale letter i.e. form no.21 and 22. That due to illegal act of the respondent no.1, the market value of the vehicle has been decreased. That the act of opposite parties of selling the old vehicle is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite party No.1 may kindly be directed to make the payment of Rs.500000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment and Rs.25000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant as explained in relief clause.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties filed their written reply submitting therein that the said vehicle was sold on 31.03.2017 of the model of 2016 and same was duly told to the complainant by the respondents at the time of sale of vehicle and that is why an amount of Rs.203450/- was less charged from the complainant and deposited in his account on 24.04.2017 which is clear from the record of respondents. That there is no cheating or any deficiency in service on the part of respondents. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied. That complainant is not entitled for any relief and dismissal of complaint has been sought.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.C1, documents Ex.C2 to C8 and has closed his evidence on dated 11.03.2019. Ld. counsel for the OPs made a statement that reply already filed on behalf of OPs be read in evidence and closed her evidence.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. In the present case the grievance of the complainant is that an old vehicle has been sold by the respondents. In fact the vehicle was manufactured in the year of 2016 and complainant purchased the same in the year of 2017 and at the time of purchase of the vehicle, the value of the said vehicle has been decreased due to the model of the vehicle. The complainant has placed on record documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C8 including Form No.24, Form No.21 and Form no.22.
6. We have perused all the relevant documents placed on record by the complainant. In the present case respondents merely filed a written statement and regarding the evidence, they made a statement that reply filed on behalf of opposite party be read as affidavit in evidence. As per document ExC4, sale certificate issued by the manufacturer i.e. Mohan Tractor Pvt. Ltd., the month and year of the vehicle is 2017. In this document the other information is also mentioned i.e. makers name, engine number, chassis number, Horse power or cubic capacity etc. An another certificate i.e. form no.22 & 22 A placed on record as Ex.C3 by the complainant and in this document also engine number, chassis number is mentioned. The complainant has placed on record insurance policy of the vehicle which is issued for the period 31.03.2017 to 30.03.2018. A bare perusal of this document shows that this vehicle was manufactured in the year of 2017 and in the column of registration of vehicle, it is mentioned as New and the registration number of the vehicle is not mentioned in the certificate. Meaning thereby, after obtaining the requisite documents, complainant approached to the insurance company for the insurance of the vehicle and the bare perusal of Ex.C4 and Ex.C8 itself establish that the vehicle was manufactured in the year 2017 and the same was sold in the same year in the month of March 2017.
7. In the present complaint, the complainant’s contention is that old vehicle has been sold by the respondent officials which was manufactured in the year 2016 and sold in the year of 2017. As per Ex.C2 form no.24(Motor vehicle register) issued by the Registration Authority R.T.A. Kaithal shows that the vehicle was manufactured in the year of 12/2016. This certificate was issued by the Transport authority after obtaining the required documents for the registration of the vehicle i.e. form no.21, 22 & 22A and certificate Ex.C2. The manufacture year is mentioned as 2016 by the Registration Authority. Meaning thereby a wrong entry has been mentioned in their record because perusal of Ex.C4 sale certificate itself shows that vehicle was manufactured in the year of 2017. So in document Ex.C6, it has been mentioned in the Registration certificate that the vehicle was manufactured in the year 12/2016. Meaning thereby there is a lapse on the part of registration authority Kaithal and they have wrongly mentioned the manufacture year of the vehicle in question. Whereas the other documents indicates that the vehicle was manufactured in the year of 2017. So there is no deficiency in service on the part of respondent. As such present complaints is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
8. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs.
9. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
04.10.2019.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
…...........................................
Renu Chaudhary, Member.
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.