ORDER

SRI.H.R. SRINIVAS.  PRESIDENT

1.     This is the Complaint filed by the Complainant against the Opposite Party (herein referred to as OP) under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 for the deficiency in service in not getting the RC transferred to the name of the purchasers through it, though the vehicle was delivered and OP agreed to get the vehicle transferred within 120 to 180 days and for return of the vehicle bearing Reg.No.MA-01 AH-6844 and to direct OP to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation and damages for causing mental agony distress pre-litigation cost and Rs.25,000/- towards the expenses of litigation and for  such other reliefs as the Hon’ble District Commission deems fit.

2.     The brief facts of the complaint are that; complainant was the owner of vehicle No.MH-01 AH-6844 Maruti Suzuki wagnr standing in her name she intended to sell the same through OP who is dealing with the selling of the car.  They agreed to purchase the same on 14.06.2019 and the same was handed over to the OP agreeing to sell the same and received the amount less Rs.10,000/-  which was detained by OP on the understanding that the same would be paid after the transfer of the RC to the name of the purchaser. At the time of handing over the vehicle to the OP, the same was under the insurance of third party. OP also agreed by way of agreement that the RC would be got changed to the name of the purchaser within 120 to 180 days from the date of delivery of the car. The insurance was up to 15.06.2020.  They are bound by the terms and conditions of the agreement and also the customer protection policy of the OP. Inspite of the RTO Aurangabad RTO issuing NOC in respect of the transfer of the said vehicle, OP neither intimated the complainant of such NOC being issued and processing the transfer of the RC to the name of the purchaser, though the said NOC was issued by the concerned RTO as per their portal VAHAN. She had to send emails on 24.01.2020, 29.01.2020, 19.02.2020, 30.02.2020, 18.03.2020 and 04.08.2020 apart from making several calls to the customer care helpline seeking update of the transfer of the RC but OP did not inform the update, except stating that RC transfer is in process.  She was put to tremendous pressures and mental agony as the vehicle was not transferred by transferring the RC and the OP not renewing and extending the insurance for further period which has thrown the complainant for vulnerability of being held liable for civil and criminal action in case the vehicle met with accident or otherwise.  Inspite of the OP agreeing to transfer the vehicle to the name of the purchaser has not adhered to the commitment made under the agreement and also caped the liability to 5 lakhs only through their website clearly mentions that the liability would be up to 10 lakhs in case the RC is not transferred to the purchasers name and also in case the complainant adheres to the terms and conditions of the customer protection policy. Hence she had to issue a legal notice demanding the same and also demanding the OP to return the vehicle along with damages and cost of litigation and prayed the commission to allow the complaint for the unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of OP.

3.     Upon issuance of notice OP appeared before the commission through one advocate Lakhsmikanth, but did not file version inspite of taking several opportunities.  At the expiry of the 45 days from the date of service of notice also, OP did not file the version. Hence the commission considered that there is no version to be filed by the OP. 

4.     In order to prove the case, complainant filed her affidavit evidence and produced documents. Arguments Heard. The following points arise for our consideration:-

1) Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties?

2) Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief prayed for in the complaint?

5.     Our answers to the above points are:-

POINT NO.1 :   IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

POINT NO.2  :  PARTLY IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

                                For the following.

REASONS

POINT No.1:-

6.     On perusing the complaint, documents, evidence filed by the complainant, it becomes clear that, the complainant is the owner of vehicle No.MH 01 AH 6844 Maruti Suzuki wagnor and on 14.06.2019 she handed over the same to the OP by selling the same by way of delivering the vehicle which has been accepted by OP . The documents produced and marked reveals that the said sale is for Rs.92,000/- of which Rs.1,000/- is the service charge /process charge of car selling by OP, and Rs.10,000/- is retained for the presence of complainant before the RTO and the same would be returned after the RC transferred and the request for RC transferred could be raised within 120 days of the car delivery . As per the terms and conditions the RC of the car ought to have been got transferred. There is no documents produced by OP inspite of the complainant issuing legal notice and also making email correspondences regarding the OP raising the request to the RTO for transferring the RC in the name of the purchaser. On perusing the Email correspondences which mentions that “we have checked on the status of the car, the RC transfer of the vehicle is in process and further you will be entitle for three fold benefits when you sell the car with us.”  It is also mentioned that once the ownership is transferred we will send an email with RC transfer proof.  Even in the month of August 2020, complainant has written a email stating that he has not received copy of the NOC and the vehicle transferred document. When this is taken into consideration along with date of delivery of the vehicle i.e 14.06.2019 the OP has not taken any care or caution and steps to transfer the vehicle to the purchaser.  Even in the emails OP has not disclosed as to whom the said vehicle was sold,  let alone the transfer of RC. In view of this, there is deficiency in service on the part OP in not taking any steps and process regarding transfer of RC to the purchaser from it and also has not taken any steps to return Rs.10,000/- which it retained for due presence of the complainant before the RTO. Hence we hold OP for deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice. Hence we answer POINT NO.1 IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

POINT NO.2:

7.     Complainant has sought return of the vehicle.  It is not clear whether OP has sold the said vehicle to the third party and has delivered the same pending transfer of the RC as there is no mention by the OP in the emails that it has sold the vehicle to such a person and the RC has been changed.

8.     If the vehicle is sold to any person, then OP is directed to issue the copy of the RC transferred to the name of such a person within 2 months from the date of receipt of this order and also to return Rs.10,000/- along with interest at 12% per annum from the date of it taking delivery of the vehicle i.e. 14.06.2019.   If at all, the vehicle is not yet sold, we hereby ordered OP to return the vehicle to the complainant and to receive back the  amount of Rs.80,000/- from the complainant within one month from thereafter. We are also of the opinion that, complainant has to be compensated by OP for causing her damages for putting her under mental tension and agony by paying a sum of Rs.15,000/- and also a litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/- and answer POINT NO.2 PARTLY IN THE AFFIRMATIVE and pass the following:

ORDER

1. Complaint is allowed in part with cost.
2. OP is directed to issue the copy of the RC transferred to the name of such a person within 2 months from the date of receipt of this order and also to return Rs.10,000/- along with interest at 12% per annum from the date of it taking delivery of the vehicle i.e. 14.06.2019 and OP to return the vehicle to the complainant and to receive back the  amount of Rs.80,000/- from the complainant within one month from thereafter.
3. Further OP is hereby directed to pay Rs.15,000/- towards compensation and Rs.10,000/- towards cost of the litigation and other expenses to the complainant.
4. OP is further directed comply the above order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and submit the compliance report to this forum within 15 days thereafter.
5. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.

Note: You are hereby directed to take back the extra copies of the Complaints/version, documents and records filed by you within one month from the date of receipt of this order.

(Dictated to the Stenographer over the computer, typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Commission on this day the 22^nd day of August 2022)

MEMBER                 MEMBER                PRESIDENT

ANNEXURES

1. Witness examined on behalf of the Complainant/s by way of affidavit:

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:

Ex P1: Copy of the customer application form dt:14.06.2019.

Ex P2: Copy of the vehicle delivery acknowledgment receipt.

Ex. P3: Copy of the customer protection policy.

Ex P4: Copy of the extracts from the website of OP.

Ex P5: Copy of printout of status of the vehicle.

Ex P6: Copy of email conversation.

Ex P7: Copy of the legal notice

Ex P8: Copy of the email acknowledgment of receipt of legal notice.

Ex P9: Certificate u/s 65B (4) of the Indian Evidence Act.

2. Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite party/s by way of affidavit:

RW-1: - Nil-

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Opposite Party/s

- Nil-

MEMBER         MEMBER        PRESIDENT

RAK*