DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESAL COMMISSION
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C.C. No. 409/2018
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
04.10.2018 11.10.2018 08.07.2022
Complainant/s:- | Sri Sayantan Sarkar, National Park, P.O. and P.S. Naihati, Dist- North 24 Parganas, State of West Bengal, Pin-743165. = Vs = |
Opposite Party/s:- | 1.Naihati Automobile, represented by its prop. Joy Mukherjee, Bora, Talikhola, P.O. Garifa, P.S. Naihati, Dist- North 24 Pgs, 2.Joy Mukherjee, Prop. Naihati Automobile, Bora, Talikhola, P.O. Garifa, P.S. Naihati, Dist- North 24 Parganas, State of West Bengal, Pin- 743166. |
P R E S E N T :- Shri Debasis Mukhopadhyay…………President.
:- Smt. Monisha Shaw …………………. Member.
JUDGMENT/FINAL ORDER
This is a complaint under Section 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
The complainant stated that the complainant purchased a two wheeler vehicle from the O.P. No.1 of which the O.P. No.2 is the proprietor. The complainant purchased the two wheeler Bajaj Pulsar 135 on 15.11.2017 at a consideration money of Rs. 77,700/-. The said vehicle was serviced twice from O.P.No.1. The O.P issued money receipt and also road challan in the name of the complainant after deliveryof the two wheller and it was promised that certificate of registration, purchase bill, pollution certificate, road tax receipt and insurance certificate of the vehicle would be handed over shortly. But till date the opposite parties did not deliver the aforesaid documents, moreover he is claiming Rs, 10,000/- for handing over those documents. The complainant tried to settle the matter through negotiation but in vain. Hence the complainant filed this case and praying for direction to the opposite parties to hand over the aforesaid documents in respect of the vehicle to the complainant and also for compensation and cost.
The O.Ps did not appear to file written version and to contest the case.
The Ld .Advocate for the complainant submitted that the O.Ps did not appear before the Assistant Director, C.A. and F.B.P during the conciliation proceedings to settle the case in spite of service of notice. He submitted that the complainant has produced the documents and it would appear from the documents that the complainant did not provide the certificate of registration insurance certificate, road tax receipt etc. in spite of repeated requests and on the other hand the O.Ps are demanding heavy amount for providing the said documents. He prayed for reliefs as per prayer of the complainant.
Considering the contention of the complainant and the documents filed it is found that the complainant purchased one two wheeler from the O.Ps and complainant paid the amount of Rs. 50,000/-and Rs. 27,700/- against cash money receipts. It is also admitted fact that the complainant was delivered the two wheeler. But there is nothing on record and no document is
filed by the complainant that there was any agreement between the parties to provide the certificate of registration, road tax receipt, insurance certificate or pollution under control certificate at the cost of the O.Ps. From the documents of purchase as per the cash receipt the complainant received the two wheeler and acknowledged the receipt of the two wheeler mentioned in the cash money receipts by signature of the complainant. In absence of any
Contd/-2
C.C. No. 409/2018
:: 2 ::
separate agreement or any documents that the O.Ps had an obligation to supply the registration certificate, insurance certificate etc. as mentioned in the complaint at the cost of O.Ps it is found that the complainant has failed to prove his case that the O.Ps had an obligation to supply the aforesaid documents at the cost of the O.Ps and therefore it is found that the complainant could not prove his case and therefore the complainant is not entitled to get the decree as prayed for.
Hence,
it is Ordered,
that the case be and the same is dismissed exparte against the O.Ps.
Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per the CPR, 2005.
Dictated & Corrected by me
President
President
Member
