IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOLLAM

DATED THIS THE   8^th  DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021

Present: -      Sri. E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim, B.A, LLM. President

        Smt.S.Sandhya   Rani. Bsc, LLB ,Member

        Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member

    CC.No.124/2019

George Cheriyan,Cheerankavil,

Nedummpayikkulam,Kundara, Kollam

(By Adv.G.Vijayakumar)                                                        :           Complainant

V/s                                                                                                     

1. Rassac, S/o Shahul Hameed,

    Kallupettiyil,

   Memmannadi,Kadampanad P.O.

2. R.T.O., R.T.Office,

     Pathamathitta                                                                            :          Opposite parties

         ORDER

Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member

            This is a case based on a complaint filed U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

            The averments in the complaint in short are as follows:-

            The 1^st opposite party had purchased a Bajaj Caliber Motor Cycle bearing No.KL-4G/1288 owned by the complainant, on behalf of Auto Point , Alappattu Junction, Kulakkada for Rs.35,000/-.  While taking possession of the vehicle the 1^st opposite party had received duly signed ownership transfer form from the complainant.  Thereafter the 1^st opposite party came to the residence of the complainant at Cheerankavu and handed over the vehicle bearing No.KL-26A-3813, 2009 Model Baja Pulsar Bike which was verified and satisfied by the complainant at the 1^st opposite party workshop, the price of the vehicle was already agreed.  While transferring the vehicle the 1^st opposite party had given the duly signed ownership transfer form to the complainant.  But the 1^st opposite party has not made any steps to transfer the vehicle in his name or in the name of the Auto Point.  The complainant has intimated this matter to the opposite party through telephone as well as personally.  But on all these occasion the 1^st opposite party promised the complainant that he would transfer the ownership but till now it was not transferred.  Thereafter the complainant had filed a petition before the Consumer Vigilance Cell on 10.08.2014 and a notice was send to the 1^st opposite party from the authority concerned.   But no response on the part of the 1^st opposite party and hence the complainant has filed a complaint before the District Legal Service Authority on 17.11.2014 and it was numbered as PLP(4) 1214/14.  1^st opposite party failed to appear before the Legal Service Authority and the said complaint was closed on 18.03.2015 and till then the ownership of the vehicle was not transferred to the name of 1^st opposite party.  Thereafter on 20.02.2015 the complainant has preferred a complaint before the RTO, Pathanamthitta and Circle Inspector of Police, Adoor but all were in vain.  The act of the 1^st opposite party is against the agreement between the complainant and it is violation of the agreement.  According to the complainant the 1^st opposite party at the time of sale had promised to change the name within 30 days.  The 1^st opposite party had not transferred the ownership of KL-4G/1288 Pulser Caliber Motor Cycle till now and thereby committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.  The non-change of name in the R.C particulars has caused severe mental agony to the complainant and he apprehends that the 1^st opposite party will utilize this vehicle for any illegal purpose and thereby there is a chance that the police or excise cases will be instituted against the said vehicle.  Hence the complaint.

            In response to the notice issued the opposite parties had neither appeared before the commission nor filed any version.    Hence they were set exparte. 

The complainant has filed affidavit by reiterating the averments in the complaint and got marked Ext.Ext.P1 and  P2 documents.

            Ext.P1 is the sale letter executed between complainant and 1^st opposite party dated 09.05.2013.  Ext.P2 is the final order dated 18/03/2015 passed by District Legal Service Authority.  Heard the counsel for the complainant and perused the records.

            The unchallenged averments in the affidavit coupled with Ext.P1 and P2 documents would establish that the 1^st opposite party has not transferred the ownership of the motor cycle Bajaj Caliber No.KL-4G/1288.  Ext.P1 vehicle sale agreement is a mutual agreement.  Both the complainant and opposite parties had agreed to exchange of the motor cycle     KL-26A-3813, 2009 Model Baja Pulsar with KL-4G/1288 Bajaj Caliber  each other and as per the agreement both parties had to effect the transfer of ownership in respect of the respective vehicle in their name.  But according to the complainant 1^st opposite party is reluctant to transfer the ownership of the vehicle bearing No.KL-4G/1288 Bajaj Caliber Motor Cycle.  It is pertinent to note that the complainant has filed a complaint before the RTO, Pathanamthitta and the reply was given by the RTO, Pathanamthitta that the aforesaid motor cycles KL-4G/1288 and KL -26A-3813 is not known by the records available in the office.  Moreover no application for change of ownership was filed before the RTO.  It is also mentioned in the reply letter that the motor cycle bearing No.KL 26 A-3813 is coming under the jurisdiction of Adoor Jt.RTO and they advised to enquire the matter before Adoor RTO.  The 2^nd opposite party is a Government servant and his name has been deleted from the array of the opposite parties.  Thereafter the complainant has filed complaint before the District Legal Service Authority as PLP(4) 1214/14 and due to the non-appearance of the 1^st opposite party the complainant was closed on 18.03.2015.  This is evident from the Ext.P2 document.  The 1^st opposite party till now had not transferred the ownership of the motor cycle bearing KL-4G/1288.

            It is clear from the available materials that the complainant would come within the definition of the consumer and there is clear deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the side of the 1^st opposite party since 1^st opposite party had violated the terms and conditions in Ext.P1 document.  Therefore the complaint is only to be allowed.

            In the result complaint stands allowed directing the 1^st opposite party to take steps to transfer/change the ownership of motor cycle bearing No.KL 4G 1288 Bajaj Caliber Motor bike from the name of the complainant to the name of 1^st opposite party. 

The 1^st opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.1,000/- as compensation and Rs.1,000/- as costs of the proceedings to the complainant.

The 1^st opposite party is also directed to comply with the above directions within 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant  Smt. Minimol.S transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the  Open Commission this the 8^th  day of  November 2021.

STANLY HAROLD:Sd/-

  E.M .MUHAMMED IBRAHIM:Sd/-

        S.SANDHYA  RANI:Sd/-

                                                                                                        Forwarded/by Order

                                                                                                         Senior superintendent

INDEX

Witnesses Examined for the Complainant:-Complainant filed affidavit

Documents marked for the  complainant

Ext.P1              : Sale letter dated 09.05.2013

Ext.P2                          : Final order dated 18.03.2015 passed by District Legal Service Authority

Witnesses Examined for the opposite party:-Opposite parties  remains exparte