| ORDER | BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR. Consumer Complaint No 218 of 2015 Date of Institution: 09.04.2015 Date of Decision: 20.11.2015 Harpal Singh aged about 45 years son of S. Inder Singh, R/O H.No. 19/2, Dashmesh Nagar, Guru Nanakpura Road, Kot Khalsa, Amritsar Complainant Versus Novelty Hyundai through its person Incharge/Authorized Signatory, G.T. Road, Amritsar Opposite Party Complaint under section 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Present: For the Complainant : Sh.Preetpal Singh,Advocate For the Opposite Party : Sh. Mohan Arora,Advocate Quorum: Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member Sh. Anoop Sharma, Member Order dictated by: Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President. - Present complaint has been filed by Harpal Singh under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that he purchased one car Grand i10 Magna from opposite party on 8.9.2014 after getting finance facility from State Bank of India,Putligarh Branch, Amritsar. The temporary certificate of registration bearing No. PB-02-BU-2084 was issued, which was valid upto 8.10.2014. According to the complainant on 8.9.2014, he paid Rs. 1,48,000/- to the opposite party, which included the amount for permanent RC @ 6% and other Government taxes. On 17.9.2014 the remaining amount of Rs. 3,40,000/- was transferred from the account of the complainant to the account of the opposite party. In the month of October 2014 complainant visited the opposite party and requested them for the RC of the vehicle in question and he was told that due to some technical problem they had not received the RC from the office of DTO,Amritsar. Thereafter complainant visited the opposite party time and again, but to no avail. However, in the month of January, 2015 opposite party told him that complainant has to pay 2% extra money for getting RC and other documents of the complainant as the Government vide notification dated 7.10.2014, enhanced the rates of registration from 6% to 8%. Then complainant stated that as he had paid and applied for the registration prior to the date of notification, opposite party told him that they cannot do anything and flatly refused to deliver him the RC and other documents. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service, complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite party to immediately issue him the RC, bill and second key of the vehicle. Compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- alongwith litigation expenses were also demanded.
- On notice, opposite party appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that dispute in the present case is involved regarding deposit of excessive rate of tax which was to be paid by the complainant. But to avoid the payment of excess rate of tax and to pressurize the opposite party, complainant has filed the present complaint. It was submitted that on receipt of information regarding increase of tax by 2% , complainant was requested to deposit the increased amount of tax, but the complainant did not deposit the same with the opposite party. It was further submitted that as per the instructions of the Punjab Govt., registration certification of vehicle is to be applied by the dealer/seller of the vehicle , the amount is to be paid by the customer and in the present case, excess amount is also to be paid by the complainant himself. It was submitted that complete payment of the car was received by the opposite party from the complainant on 17.9.2014 and thereafter when the opposite party had prepared the documents for the preparation of RC of the car, but meantime online payment system of the DTO was not working and as such amount of tax could not be deposited and after that tax amount was increased by the Govt.. As such said increased amount of tax was rightly demanded by the opposite party, which the complainant refused to pay to the opposite party. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
- Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1 alongwith documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-6.
- Opposite party tendered affidavit of Sh.Rajesh Kakaria Ex.OP1, copy of resolution Ex.OP2, copy of power of attorney Ex.OP3, copy of RC Ex.OP4.
- We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties, arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the parties and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for both the parties.
- From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it is clear that complainant purchased i10 Hyundai car from the opposite party on 8.9.2014. The opposite party issued temporary certificate of registration to the vehicle bearing No.PB-02-BU-2084 for one month which was valid upto 8.10.2014. The complainant paid Rs. 1,48,000/- in cash to the opposite party on 8.9.2014 which included the amount of permanent RC and other Government taxes for the registration of the vehicle of the complainant. On 17.9.2014 a sum of Rs. 3,40,000/- was transferred from the account of the complainant to the account of opposite party. But the opposite party did not hand over the permanent RC of the vehicle to the complainant rather the opposite party demanded enhanced rate of registration of the vehicle from the complainant as per notification dated 7.10.2014 of the Government of Punjab. The complainant had paid the requisite fee for the registration of the vehicle of the complainant to the opposite party before 7.10.2014, but the opposite party failed to get the RC of the said vehicle prepared from the concerned department i.e. DTO, Amritsar before 7.10.2014. So it is the opposite party who is liable to pay enhanced rate/tax for registration of the vehicle. The opposite party was bound to hand over the RC to the complainant within one month from the date of delivery of the vehicle i.e. before 8.10.2014, but the RC of the vehicle has been given by the opposite party to the complainant on 19.11.2015 and that too in this Forum after the filing of the present complaint. Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.
- Whereas the case of the opposite party is that complete payment of the car was received by the opposite party from the complainant on 17.9.2014. The opposite party prepared the documents for the preparation of the RC of the vehicle in question but meantime online payment system of the department i.e.,DTO, Amritsar was not working, as such amount of tax could not be deposited with the Government for the preparation of the RC of the car . Later on the tax amount was increased by the Government vide notification dated 7.10.2014. The said amount of enhanced tax was demanded by the opposite party from the complainant but he refused to pay the same. However, the opposite party after making payment of even enhanced charges of the RC from its own pocket got prepared the RC of the vehicle of the complainant and handed over the same to the complainant on 19.11.2015 without charging any further amount from the complainant. As such there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.
- From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that complainant purchased the vehicle in question i.e. i10 car from the opposite party on 8.9.2014 and delivery of the car was given by the opposite party to the complainant on 8.9.2014 on receipt of part payment of Rs. 1,48,000/- in cash, whereas the balance amount of Rs. 3,40,000/- was paid by the complainant by taking a loan from the bank, to the opposite party on 17.9.2014 as per bank transfer. It is the admitted case of the parties that the complainant paid the entire charges for the registration of the vehicle in question to the opposite party. The delivery of the car was given by the opposite party to the complainant on 8.9.2014 and they also issued temporary registration number to the vehicle of the complainant i.e. registration No. PB-02-BU-2084 which was valid for one month i.e. upto 8.10.2014. Therefore, the opposite party was bound to hand over the permanent RC of the vehicle in question to the complainant before or by 8.10.2014. But the opposite party did not get prepared the permanent RC of the vehicle in question from the concerned department i.e. DTO,Amritsar. In the meantime i.e. vide notification dated 7.10.2014 Government of Punjab enhanced the registration charges of the vehicle. The opposite party was, therefore, liable to pay the enhanced charges of the registration of the vehicle in question to the concerned department i.e. DTO, Amritsar. However, opposite party got prepared the RC of the vehicle of the complainant by making payment of the enhanced charges also, during the pendency of the present complaint and handed over the RC of the vehicle in question to the complainant on 19.11.2015 i.e. after a lapse of a period of more than one year because the opposite party was bound to furnish the RC of the vehicle in question to the complainant on or before 8.10.2014 and it became very difficult rather risky for the complainant to drive the vehicle without RC. So the opposite party is certainly in deficiency of service qua the complainant.
- Resultantly this complaint is disposed of with the directions to the opposite party to pay compensation of Rs. 5000/-. Opposite party is also directed to pay litigation expenses Rs. 2000/- to the complainant. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.
Dated: 20.11.2015. (Bhupinder Singh) President /R/ (Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) (Anoop Sharma) Member Member | |
