Haryana

Karnal

36ex/2012

Subhash S/o Harikesh - Complainant(s)

Versus

P.P. Automotive Pvt. Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. S.S. Moonak

20 Oct 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Executive Petition No.. 36 of 2012

                                                               Date of instt. 1.3.2012

                                                               Date of decision: 20.10.2015

 

Subhash son of Shri Harikesh resident of village Sanch tehsil and distt.Karnal.

                                                   ……….Decree Holder-Complainant.

                              Versus

 

1.P.P.Automotive, Ist Floor, Nirmal Motors, Meerut Road, Karnal through its Branch Manager.

2.The Registration Authority, Karnal.

                                                           ……… JD/Opposite party.

 

                    Application U/s 27  of the Consumer

                     Protection Act.

 

Before          Sh.K.C.Sharma……. President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma ………Member.

                   Smt.Shashi Sharma…..Member.     

 

 Present:       Sh.S.S.Moonak Advocate for the Decree Holder.

                   Sh.G.P.Singh Advocate for OP/JD  No.1.

ORDER:

 

                        This application u/s 27(1) of the Consumer Protection Act has been filed by the complainant/Decree Holder Subhash for compliance of the order dated 26.06.2009 passed by this Forum.  The relevant portion of the order dated 26.6.2009 is reproduced as under:

 

                   “Since it is not possible at this stage to exchange the trucks between the complainants, the  OP no.1. is directed to issue fresh sale  certificate with correct engine and chassis numbers of the trucks, which are actually in possession of the complainants and got the same registered  in their respective names by paying the requisite fee and  penalty, whatsoever within a period of sixty days of the receipt of the copy of this order. OP no.1 shall also pay compensation of Rs.30,000/- each to the complainants by way of depositing the same in their respective loan accounts with ICICI Bank Ltd. within a period of 15 days of the receipt of the copy of this order.”

 

2.                Feeling aggrieved by the said order  M/s P.P. Automotive preferred appeal before the Hon’ble State Commission which was decided on 10.1.2010. The Hon’ble State Commission passed the following order:

 

                   “Admittedly, the main grievance of the complainant before the District Forum was with respect to the wrong mentioning of the engine and chassis number of the truck sold to the complainant by the Opposite Parties, which has already been redressed by the District Forum by issuing direction to the opposite party No.1 to issue a fresh sale certificate with correct engine and chassis numbers.  In addition to this complainant has also been awarded the cost of Rs.1000/- in that event, awarding of compensation of Rs.30,000/- to the complainant appears to be on higher side. Before granting  the relief to the complainant, both the parties must be kept at par. In this view of the matter, compensation of Rs.30,0000/- awarded to the complainant is reduced to Rs.7500/-.”

 

                   With the above modification in the impugned order with respect to the reduction of the compensation, this appeal is disposed of without any further alternation in the relief granted to the complainant. “

 

3.                On 18.5.2012 the learned counsel for the JDs i.e. P.P. Automotive had given a cheque of Rs.7500/- dated 25.4.2012 and paid cash amount of Rs.15000/- for payment of penalty upto 30.6.2012 alongwith sale letter to complainant/DH and assured that further amount if any spent on registration  would also be paid. The cheque, sale letter and cash amount were received by the complainant/DH. Statements of complainant and learned counsel for the JD were recorded in that regard. Thereafter, complainant moved an application for directing the OP/JD to pay balance amount of Rs.16289/- incurred by him for registration of the vehicle and details of the amount were mentioned on a sheet of paper, but the details did not indicate as to what amount was spent on registration and what amount was paid as penalty.        The learned counsel for the DH/complainant is also unable to explain the amounts spent on registration and penalty. Under such circumstances the matter cannot be kept pending for indefinite period.  Thus, the demand raised by the complainant/DH is not justified. Therefore, this application for giving direction to the OP/JD to make the payment of the balance amount is dismissed.

 

4.                The facts and circumstances show that compliance of the order has been made by the JD No.1. i. e. P.P. Automotive and the file be consigned to the record room.

 

Announced
dated:20.10.2015                                                                             

                                                               (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 (Anil Sharma)       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member.