Hon'ble Mr. Haradhan Mukhopadhyay, President.

The case record is taken up for passing Final Order.

The basic fact of the grievance of the Complainant reduced in black and white is that the Complainant Joynal Abedin intended to purchase a car from the OP Shri Samir Das as he had a second hand car to sell. Accordingly, an agreement was entered into between the two parties on a non-judicial Stamp paper in February, 2018. The price of the said second hand car was fixed at Rs.75,000/-. At the time of agreement it was agreed that the cheque of Rs.50,000/- and cash Rs.5,000/- are to be paid during the first time and thereafter the balance of Rs.20,000/- has to be paid at the time of changing the ownership of the car. Accordingly, the Complainant paid Rs.55,000/- to the OP during the purchase of the said car. After a few days the Complainant met with the OP for changing the ownership of the said disputed car against which the OP assured that it would be changed shortly. It is pertinent to mention that the Registration No of the said car is WB 74 E 6400, Engine No. G10BBN178675 Maruti Udyog 50 Zen VXI E2. Despite repeated requests by the Complainant the OP unnecessarily dragged the matter and refused to change the ownership. Finding no other alternative the Complainant sent a legal notice to the OP on 09.09.2019 which he received on 16.09.2019 but did not cooperate nor did he change the ownership. Thus the acts and omissions of the OP tantamount to deficiency in service for which the Complainant has filed the present case. The cause of action for the present case arose on 12.02.2018, 09.09.2019 and 16.09.2019. The Complainant prayed for an award directing the OP to change the ownership of the disputed car or refund the advance amount of Rs.55,000/-, Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental pain and agony, Rs.25,000/- for deficiency in service and Rs.15,000/- towards cost of the proceedings and other relief as per law and equity.

The OP Shri Samir Das appeared in this case but subsequently he preferred not to contest the case for which this Commission by its Order No. 08 dt. 13.12.2021 and Order No. 09 dt. 27.12.2021 decided to hear the case ex-parte against the OP.

The Complainant in order to establish the claim adduced evidence by filing evidence in affidavit and documents before the Commission.

Perused the pleadings of the Complainant and the documents in the case record. Heard the argument advanced by Ld. Advocate for the Complainant. The statements  made in the evidence in affidavit are absolutely in consonance with the averments made in the complaint petition.

The OP did not controvert the specific allegation of the Complainant in his complaint, since the OP decided not to contest the case and did not file any written version.

The Annexure-A is the agreement between the Complainant and the OP dated 12.02.2018 wherein both the parties duly signed on a non judicial Stamp paper wherein it is categorically laid down that the OP sold out the said disputed car for Rs.75,000/- to the Complainant against which he received Rs.5,000/- in cash and Rs.50,000/- through cheque vide Cheque No. 008383, 736027002, 38832131 drawn on United Bank of India against the said car No. WB 74 E 6400, Engine No. G10BBN178675. The said sell agreement was also signed in presence of three witnesses.

The aforesaid agreement dt. 12.02.2018 could not be controverted and its averment stands unchallenged. Accordingly, it stands well proved that the OP agreed to sell the said car after receiving a sum of Rs.55,000/-

The allegation of the Complainant that the OP neglected and refused to change the ownership of the said car within the stipulated time and thereafter, as well despite repeated requests by the Complainant stands well proved in as much as the OP did not contest the case or cross-examine against the evidence on affidavit.

The Complainant also proved the legal notice sent by the Complainant through his lawyer on 09.09.2019 since the OP did not send any reply against the said legal notice.

In the light of the aforesaid discussion and observations made in the foregoing paragraphs, a reasonable inference is drawn that the Complainant successfully proved the case as a Consumer against the OP. It stands also duly proved that the misdeeds on the part of the OP should be considered as deficiency in service which caused mental pain and agony to the Complainant.

Accordingly, the case of the Complainant succeeds ex-parte against the OP.

Hence, it is

Ordered

            That the Complaint Case be and the same is allowed ex-parte with cost of Rs.5,000/-.

The Complainant do get an award of a direction for changing the ownership by the OP in his favour. The OP is directed to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- for deficiency in service, mental pain and agony and harassment and Rs.5,000/- for cost of the proceedings (total Rs.30,000/-) within thirty days from the date of passing Final Order to the Complainant failing which the OP shall pay an interest of 6% p.a. on the awarded sum. The OP is further directed to change the ownership of the disputed car within one month from the date of passing the order in favour of the Complainant i/d the Complainant shall be entitled to take recourse of law.

Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied to the concerned party by hand/by Registered Post with A/D forthwith, free of cost, for information & necessary action as per rule.

The copy of the Final Order is also available in the official website: www.confonet.nic.in.

Dictated and corrected by me.