Punjab

StateCommission

FA/1280/2013

Hemant Goyal Motors - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ram Lal - Opp.Party(s)

S.R. Bansal

02 Mar 2016

ORDER

                                                               FIRST ADDITIONAL BENCH

 

STATE  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL COMMISSION,   PUNJAB

          SECTOR 37-A, DAKSHIN MARG, CHANDIGARH.

                                     

                   First Appeal No.1280 of 2013

 

                                                Date of Institution: 22.11.2013

                                                Date of Decision:  02.03.2016

 

Hemant Goyal Motors, Rajpura Road, Patiala through its authorized signatory-cum-team leader Mr. Vinod Kumar.

 

                                                                   Appellant/Opposite party

                             Versus

 

Ram Lal son of Sh. Amar Nath, Resident of Lehragagga, Tehsil Lehra District Sangrur.

 

                                                                  Respondent/Complainant

         

First Appeal against order dated 11.10.2013 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,  Patiala.

Quorum:-

 

          Shri J. S. Klar, Presiding Judicial Member.

            Shri.H.S.Guram, Member

 

Present:-

 

          For the appellant             : Sh.S.R Bansal, Advocate       

          For the respondent          : Sh. Aminder Singh, Advocate

          . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 

         J.S KLAR, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER :-

         

          Aggrieved by order dated 11.10.2013 of District Consumer Disputed Redressal Forum Patiala (in short, the District Forum), the appellant of this appeal (the opposite party in the complaint) has directed this appeal against the respondent of this appeal (the complainant in the complaint). The District Forum Patiala accepted the complaint of the complainant by directing the OP to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/-  to respondent of this appeal for mental harassment for non-delivery the certificate of registration, besides cost of litigation of Rs.2500/-. The instant appeal has been preferred against the same by the opposite party now appellant in this appeal.

2.      The complainant Ram Lal has filed the complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, "the Act") against the OP on the averments that he met with an accident, in which his left leg was damaged and he has faced ambulatory problem. He purchased car for his personal convenience on 30.05.2012 from OP make Tata Vista LX TDI BS3 of 1405 CC bearing Engine No.4751DTI4DXYP26419, Chasis No.MAT608525CPD28625. The complainant got it financed and entire money was paid to OP, as price of it. The complainant paid entire amount of Rs.10,500/- for the registration of the vehicle to OP on 31.08.2012, vide receipt no.1494 dated 31.08.2012 towards full and final amount. It was assured to the complainant that the registration certificate of the vehicle would be provided to complainant within 15 days. All the original documents of vehicle i.e. bill etc are with OP, which were necessary for issuance of registration certificate. The complainant visited the office of the OP, but OP put off the complainant on one pretext or the other. Legal notice dated 01.12.2012 was also served upon OP through Sh. Anil Kumar Garg Advocate, but to no effect. The complainant has, thus, prayed that OP be directed to issue registration certificate of the vehicle to complainant and be also directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental harassment and Rs.11,000/- as costs of litigation.

3.      Upon notice, OP appeared and filed written reply raising preliminary objections that complaint is not maintainable. It was further averred that complainant paid the amount of Rs.10,500/- on 31.08.2012 and registration charges were to be enhanced from 01.09.2012 and the name of the complainant could not be punched due to deficiency in the internet server. Other complainants got their deposits punched and got their respective registration certificate and complainant knew it. The complaint was contested even on merits by OP on the above-referred grounds. It was further averred that complainant wrongly deposited the amount in the evening and any deficiency in service was vehemently denied by the OP. OP prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.      The complainant tendered in evidence, his affidavit Ex.C-A along with copies of documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-7. As against it; OP tendered in evidence affidavit of Munish Korrian Manager Sales Hemant Goyal Motors/OP Ex.OP-A. On conclusion of evidence and arguments, the District Forum Patiala, accepted the complaint of the complainant by virtue of order dated 11.10.2013. Dissatisfied with the order of the District Forum Patiala dated 11.10.2013, the OP the present appellant, carried this appeal against the same.

5.      We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also examined the evidence on the record in this case. Ex.C-A is affidavit of complainant in support of his averments on the record. Ex.C-1 is legal notice dated 01.12.2012 sent by the complainant to OPs regarding above deficiency in service. Ex.C-3 is receipt for deposit of Rs.10,500/-  by the complainant on 31.08.2012. Ex.C-4 is the invoice of the car. Ex.C-5 is the details of the delivery letter of the car to the complainant. Ex.C-6 is certificate of the car. Ex.C-7 is temporary registration issued by OP to complainant, which was valid till 30.05.2012.

6.      To counter this evidence, OP tendered in evidence affidavit of Munish Korrian Manger Sales Hemant Goyal Motors Rajpura Road Patiala Ex.OP-A on the record. He stated in his affidavit that complainant paid a sum of Rs.10,500/- on the last date i.e. 31.08.2012 and fee was enhanced from 01.09.2012 and this fact was brought to the notice of the complainant. He further stated that enhanced registration charges were to be levied upon the complainant.

7.      From appraisal of the above-referred evidence on the record, we find that order of the District Forum under challenge in this case is in accordance with law. The amount of Rs.10,500/- was remained deposit with the OP by the complainant on 31.08.2012 when there was no enhancement in the registration charges of the vehicle on that date. The registration charges of the vehicle were enhanced w.e.f. 01.09.2012, as per case of the OP. There is mere affidavit of Munish Korrian Manager of the OP on the record that registration fee was to be enhanced from 01.09.2012 and this fact was brought to the notice of the complainant. There is no such notification placed on the record by the OP to this effect. Once the amount was deposited with OPs on 31.08.2012, then registration charges as applicable on 31.08.2012 was to be charged from the complainant only. The complainant served a legal notice to OP, but it went un-responded on the part of the OP. We find that order of the order District Forum is in consonance with law. Deficiency in service on the part of OP now appellant is proved on the record. The District Forum rightly awarded the amount of compensation to complainant now respondent in this appeal for mental harassment and passed the necessary direction for delivery of the registration certificate to complainant. We do not find any illegality or material infirmity in the order of the District Forum under challenge in this appeal calling for any interference therein.

8.      As a result of our above discussion, we do not find any merit in the appeal and same is hereby dismissed.

9.      The appellant had deposited an amount of Rs.13,250/- with this Commission at the time of filing the appeal. This amount along with interest, if any, accrued thereon, be refunded by the registry to the complainant by way of crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days.

10.    Arguments in this appeal were heard on 26.02.2016 and the order was reserved. Copies of the order be communicated to the parties as per rules.

11.    The appeal could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of court cases.

                                                                          (J. S. KLAR)

                                                          PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER

                       

                                                         

                                                                           (H.S GURAM)

                                                                              MEMBER

 

March 2, 2016                                                            

(ravi)