J U D G E M E N T

                Interference of this Forum has been sought for by the Complainant contending gross negligence, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice in rendering necessary service towards the Complainant by the Opposite Parties. 

   In epigrammatic the case as stated in the petition of complaint is that the Complainant had purchased a two wheeler being Chasis No. ME 4JF 213 HC 8338249  and  Engine No. JF 21E 9380938,  on 01.09.2012 by paying the entire consideration price to the Opposite Party and had handed over the Road Challan in original to the Complainant. The Opposite Party had received the money from the Complainant for doing  the registration work of the said two wheeler in the name of the Complainant but failed to do the same till date. 

             The Complainant severally asked and requests the Opposite Parties for delivering all original documents  in respect of the said two wheeler in question but the Opposite party willfully and deliberately neglected and failed to do the same and harassing the Complainant.

             Ultimately the Complainant sent a legal notice on 18.09.2013 to the Opposite Party asking him to supply those relevant documents which were duly received by the Opposite Party on 23.09.2013 but the Opposite Party did not pay any heed to it, what amounts deficiency and/or negligence in rendering service towards him, for which he has to suffer harassment and mental agony and prayed for compensation. Hence, this case is filed seeking adequate redressal.

             Resisting the complaint, the Opposite Party filed the Written Version denying each and every allegation made by the Complainant in the petition of complaint contending inter alia, that the Complainant has no cause of action, and is not maintainable either in fact or in law and is totally false.

             The case as a whole as stated by the Opposite Party in the Written Version, in terse, is that, as per the Sec. 41(1) of the W.B. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the W.B. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1988, the process for obtaining the ‘Registration Certificate’ of a vehicle should be made by the Owner of such vehicle or on behalf of the Owner by a prescribed form accompanied with particular documents and information along with prescribed fees under Section 41(2) of the said Act,  before the R.T.O. The dealer has no liability to do this. Normally the registration should be done within 15 days to one month from the date of purchase of the vehicle, in default penalty is provided for along with the registration fees. But in fact this whole process is hazardous one for an individual purchaser for which the dealer voluntarily does this job for doing the registration for their customer on payment for doing such process for registration of the vehicle. But the dealer does not get any part of such expenses which the purchaser gave to the dealer for registration.

              In the instant case the Complainant did not pay any sort of expenses regarding the registration of the said two wheeler vehicle for which this dealer Opposite Party is nor liable to do the registration for the Complainant and the Complainant had decided to obtain the Registration Certificate herself or through any of her concern for which the Opposite Party has no objection thereof. The Opposite Party had supplied the copy of the ‘Sale Letter’ vide No. 3752 dated 11.09.2013 to the Complainant who made endorsement regarding the same. The Opposite Party had duly supplied the original ‘Road Challan’ bearing Sl. No. 611, dated 01.09.2012 on the very day of purchase which contains the relevant particulars regarding the said two wheeler vehicle including the acknowledgement of payment of Rs. 49,490/- only.

              Thus  the Opposite Party never intended to deceit the Complainant by any means, therefore there was no negligence or deficiency on part of the Opposite Party in rendering the service towards the Complainant and the Opposite Party prayed for dismissal of the case.

                                      Points for Consideration  

             1. Is the complaint maintainable under the C. P. Act ?

             2. Was there any negligence or deficiency in service

                                    on the part of the O.P ?                            

             3. Is the complainant entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?

                                       Decision with reasons

              All the points are taken up together for consideration for convenience and brevity.

              The main dispute between the Complainant and the Opposite Party is that whether the Opposite Party is liable to do the registration work and to supply the all other relevant documents regarding the said two wheeler vehicle in question to the Complainant or not.

              In coming into conclusion regarding the present dispute we have gone through the Complaint and Written Version and also critically appreciated and scrutinized the material documents on record.

             On overall evaluation of the argument made before us by the Ld. Lawyer for the Complainant and also the Ld. Advocate for the Opposite Party and the material evidences on record, it is evident that admittedly the Complainant is a consumer under the Opposite Party by purchasing a two wheeler vehicle on 01.09.2012 by paying a sum of Rs. 49,490/- only from the Opposite Party which is found from the photocopies of the documents (Road Challan) filed by the Complainant.

              The record reveals that specifically the Opposite Party stated regarding the rules and process of getting/obtaining the Registration Certificate from the concerned Authority,  that as per the Sec. 41(1) of the W.B. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the process for obtaining the ‘Registration Certificate’ of a vehicle should be made by the Owner of such vehicle or on behalf of the Owner by a prescribed form accompanied with some particular documents and information along with prescribed fees before the R.T.O. The Dealer has no liability to do this. Normally the registration should be done within 15 days to one month from the date of purchase of the vehicle, in default penalty is provided for along with the registration fees. So the Owner of the vehicle is only and exclusively responsible to obtain the Registration Certificate himself/herself from the Registration Authority/concerned  R.T.O  of the area and the Dealer has therefore no liability towards the purchaser regarding the same.

              Practically there are several stages required to be followed in obtaining a Registration Certificate immediately after filing the ‘Application’ before the M.V. Department after purchasing a vehicle. The said Authority is under the obligation to verify and be satisfied with some statutory ingredients under Rule 53(1) within Chapter – IV of the said Rules and as per the Rule 53(2) every Application should be accompanied by a Certificate issued by the Officer – in – Charge of the local Police Station, verifying the address of the Applicant or similar Certificate.

              To follow up the above Rules, there are several stages of Officers set up for the said purpose,  i.e. the Technical Officer, the Non – Technical Officer & R.T.O. with their specific responsibilities for sanctioning the ‘Registration Certificate’ on payment of the requisite fees thereof, viz. Registration fees, Road Tax, Life Time Tax, etc.

             But though in fact this whole process is hazardous one for an individual purchaser to get his/her individual ‘Registration Certificate’ from the concerned authority  for which the Dealer concern voluntarily does this job for doing the registration for their customer on payment of all fees for doing such process for registration of the vehicle and for getting the required ‘Registration certificate’ in the name of the said purchaser. But the Dealer does not get any part of such expenses which the purchaser gave to the Dealer for obtaining the ‘Registration Certificate’ in respect of the vehicle in the name of the purchaser.

             In the instant case, manifestly it is apparent from the photocopies of the documents filed by the Complainant that admittedly the Complainant had paid a sum of Rs. 49,490/- only to the Opposite Party as consideration value (cost price) for the said two wheeler vehicle for which the Opposite Party had duly issued and delivered the ‘Road Challan’ in favour of the Complainant.

              But the Complainant alleged that the Opposite Party had  deliberately failed and neglected to deliver the Registration Certificate in favour of the Complainant although the Opposite Party has received the money for doing the registration work delivering the ‘Registration Certificate’ of the said two wheeler vehicle from the local competent authority in the name of the Complainant. But the record clearly reveals that the Complainant miserably failed to produce any document and/or any scrap of paper from which the Complainant can show that he had ever paid any amount towards the Opposite Party and/or the Opposite Party ever received any amount of money for obtaining the ‘Registration Certificate’ and/or any other relevant documents in respect of the said two wheeler vehicle in her name as alleged by the Complainant.

             On scrutinizing the entire case record nowhere within the photocopies of the material documents/evidence which was produced by the Complainant in support of her case  it is found that the Complainant had paid any amount to the Opposite Party for doing the registration works  to get the ‘Registration Certificate’ in respect of the said two wheeler vehicle.

             Thus perusing the case record and considering the hearing of both parties it is manifestly evident that the Complainant did not pay any sum towards the Opposite Party after purchasing the said two wheeler vehicle for doing the registration works  and for which the Opposite Party is not held to be liable to hand over the document regarding the ‘Registration Certificate’ and/or any other relevant documents as claimed by the Complainant.

             But the fact remains that the Opposite Party admitted that in fact this whole process is hazardous one for an individual owner/ purchaser for which the dealer who sells the vehicle voluntarily does this job for getting the registration of the vehicle on behalf of their customer/consumer on payment for doing such process for registration of the vehicle.

               Moreover, normally to get the ‘Registration Certificate’ from the R.T.O. the Owner of the vehicle should be applied within 15 days to one month from the date of purchase of the vehicle, in default penalty is provided for along with the registration fees.

              But in the instant case, the Dealer Opposite Party does not get any part of such expenses from the purchaser for doing the registration works and the Complainant is miserably failed to produce any cogent evidence to prove that he had paid any amount to the Opposite Party for doing such registration work for obtaining the said ‘Registration Certificate’ and/or any other relevant documents in respect of the said two wheeler vehicle

              So, considering the whole situation and the instant fact and circumstances of the case, this Forum inclined to hold that if the Complainant shall pay such extra amount for doing the registration work and/or any other relevant documents, if any, then the Opposite Party is liable to provide the said documents (’Registration Certificate’ and other relevant documents, if any) towards the Complainant subject to payment of requisite fees for the same.

             Therefore, in the light of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the Complainant has not successfully proved his case and is not entitled to get the relief as prayed for and consequently the points for consideration are not decided in affirmative. But though basically the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is a beneficial legislation and enacted for benefit of the bonafide consumer, this instant case is not dismissed against the Complainant, but allowed in part with direction to the Opposite Party to do the registration work for obtaining the ‘Registration Certificate’ and/or any other relevant documents, if any, in favour of the Complainant on payment of such extra amount which the Complainant alleged for and failed to produce any document/ ‘Money Receipt’ to that effect.

              In short, the Complainant deserves success in part.

             In the result, we proceed to pass

                                                                                             O R D E R 

              That the case be and the same is allowed in part on contest against the Opposite Party without any cost.

              That the Opposite Party is directed to do the registration works and to provide the ‘Registration Certificate’  and/or any other relevant documents, if any, in favour of the Complainant subject to make payment of such extra amount (requisite Fees) for obtaining the ‘Registration Certificate’ and etc. towards the Opposite Party, within six months from the date of such payment by the Complainant. But if the Complainant shall not pay such amount, the Opposite Party has no liability towards the Complainant.

             In the event of non compliance of any portion of the order by the Opposite Party within a period of six months from the date of payment of the requisite fees to the Opposite Party, in that case the Opposite Party shall have to pay a sum of Rs. 200/- per day, from the date of actual payment by the Complainant till full satisfaction of the decree, and 50% of such amount shall be paid to the Complainant and rest 50% shall be deposited by the Opposite Party to the Consumer Legal Aid Fund.

             Let copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost when applied for.