CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel)

New Delhi – 110 016

Case No.99/2010

MRS. DEEPA

W/O SH. NAND KISORE

R/O 532, DDA FLATS,

PUL PRAHLADPUR,

NEW DELHI-110044

                                                            …………. Complainant                                                                                     

                                                Vs.

SH. RAMBIR

S/O SH. MULAYAM SINGH

PROPRIETOR

M/S R.B. AUTO DEALS,

R-35, NEAR WATER TANK,

PUL PRAHLADPUR,

M.B. ROAD,

NEW DELHI-110044

                                                …………..Respondent

                                                                                    Date of Order: 08.6.2015

O R D E R

A.S. Yadav – President

The case of the complainant is that she has purchased a TSR No. DL-1TK-7224 from OP for a sum of Rs.3,95,000/- on 18.1.2008 out of which Rs.95000/- were paid in cash and the balance amount of Rs.3 lakhs was financed from OP and that amount was to be paid to the OP in 36 instalments of Rs.12335/- each.

Complainant paid 12 instalments of Rs.12335/- each.  On 28.2.2009 the TSR met with an accident however she could not lodge claim with the insurance company in the absence of permit holder.  When she asked OP to call permit holder, he refused to call permit holder.  Even the matter was reported to the Police on 05.3.2009.

It is further stated that on 26.7.2009, OP has given an undertaking on a stamp paper attested by Public Notary that he will get Special Power of Attorney form the permit holder by 03.8.2009 and in case he is unable to do it, he will not ask for payment of balance instalments.  It is prayed that the OP be directed to return the amount paid by the complainant and also to pay compensation of Rs.4,90,000/-. 

OP in written statement took the plea that complainant paid only 12 instalments and remaining 24 instalments are still pending against the complainant and that amount comes out to be Rs.2,96,040/-.  It is further stated that complainant is in possession of the vehicle but is not paying any instalment.

We have heard Ld. Counsels for parties and carefully perused the record.

It is significant to note that complainant has purchased a commercial vehicle and it is nowhere stated in the complaint that the same has been purchased by her to earn her livelihood so on the face of it, complainant is not a consumer. 

Even otherwise the prayer made by the complainant in this case is that OP be directed to refund the amount received by him and to pay compensation of Rs.4,90,000/-.  It is significant to note that the complaint was filed on 11.2.2010 and the last instalment was paid by the complainant on 31.1.2009.  The complainant has paid only 12 instalments and 24 instalment were yet to be paid and that amount comes tout to be Rs.2,96,040/-.  In fact till the entire amount is paid, OP remains the owner of the TSR.  So as far as undertaking given by the complainant that he will get POA from the permit holder is concerned, there is nothing on the record to suggest that such undertaking given by the complainant at the time of selling of TSR and moreover complainant herself has not performed her part of contract.  She has not paid the instalments.  Complaint has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of OP hence complaint is dismissed.

Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.

    (EHTESHAM-UL-HAQ)                                                             (A.S. YADAV)

            MEMBER                                                                              PRESIDENT