Consumer Case No.-17/2021
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
Brief facts of the complainant’s case are that complainant Biraj Das on 26/10/2019 purchased a Super Splendour Motorcycle bearing Chasis No.-MBIJAW090K9H53919 , Engine No.-JA05EGK9H17765 from Opposite Party No.-1 TARANGA Automobiles, Sonai Road, Silchar-6. O.P. No.-1 is the authorized dealer of O.P. No.-2 Hero Moto Corporation Ltd. At the time of selling the above mentioned motorcycle O.P. No.-1 received from the complainant full amount of Rs.75,094/- ( Rupees seventy five thousand ninety four) only which includes Registration fees of Rs.5,300/- . That the complainant was issued a temporary registration number of his two wheeler which remains valid for one month. Thereafter the complainant several times asked the O.P. No.-1 regarding permanent registration of the vehicle and then the O.P. No-1 handed over one receipt amounting to Rs.5,300/- in the name of the complainant for online application for registration of vehicle. When the complainant enquired the matter at District Transport Office then he came to know that the receipt given by O.P. No.-1 is not genuine. He also came to know from the DTO office, Cachar that his vehicle is not eligible for registration as the Govt. of India have banned selling and registration of BS-IV vehicle. The Complainant then demanded the O.P. No.-1 refund of the entire amount with compensation but the O.P. No.-1 did not pay any heed. Though subsequently it was assured that the O.P. No.-1 would replace the alleged two wheeler but later on showed no interest. According to the complainant, the O.P. most fraudulently sold the alleged vehicle and cheated him and also due to this unfair trade practice of the O.Ps. he has suffered mental agony, harassment and also loss. The complainant has, therefore, prayed for refund of Rs.75,094/- ( Rupees seventy five thousand ninety four) alongwith interest @18% per annum, an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, pain and harassment and other reliefs.
The O.P. no.-2 Hero Moto Corporation Ltd. has submitted written statement stating, interalia, that the complaint is not maintainable, that there is no cause of action etc. It is stated that the O.P. no.-2 company is not at all involved in the process of sale of the vehicle to the customers and thus the contesting O.P. is not at all responsible for the terms of the sale by the dealer to the retail customer. It is further stated that the O.P. No.-2 is not at all liable for any disputes other than a genuine case of manufacturing defect subject to technical expert’s report. In the present case also there is no allegation of any manufacturing defect in the alleged vehicle. Under the circumstances, the O.P. no.-2 has prayed for dismissal of the case. However, O.P. No.- 1 Taranga Automobiles and O.P. No.-3 District Transport Officer did not contest the case.
In support of the case the complainant has submitted his evidence on affidavit as PW-1 and has exhibited some documents. But from the side of O.P. No.-2 no any evidence has been adduced in the case. Both the complainant and O.P. No.-2 have filed written argument. Oral argument was heard. We have also gone through the materials on record.
In his evidence PW-1, the complainant, has stated the same facts as described in his complaint petition. PW-1 has stated that on 26/10/2019 he purchased a Super Splendour Motorcycle bearing Chasis No.-MBIJAW090K9H53919 , Engine No.-JA05EGK9H17765 from Opposite Party No.-1 TARANGA Automobiles, Sonai Road, Silchar-6. At the time of selling the above mentioned motorcycle O.P. No.-1 received from him full amount of Rs.75,094/- ( Rupees seventy five thousand ninety four) only which also includes Registration fees of Rs.5,300/- . O.P. No.-1 also issued documents relating to sale. Further version of PW-1 is that he was issued a temporary registration number of his two wheeler which remains valid for one month. When he created pressure upon the O.P. No.-1 regarding permanent registration of the vehicle then the O.P. No-1 handed over one receipt amounting to Rs.5,300/- showing to have been issued by the Transport Department. According to PW-1, when he enquired the matter at District Transport Office then he came to know that the receipt given by O.P. No.-1 is not genuine. He also came to know from the DTO office, Cachar that his vehicle is not eligible for registration as the Govt. of India has already banned selling and registration of BS-IV vehicle. It has been alleged by PW-1 that by suppressing and concealing the aforesaid fact of ban the O.P. No.-1 sold the alleged vehicle. PW-1 has further alleged that though he demanded the refund of money of the vehicle with compensation but the O.P. No.-1 did not pay any heed. The evidence of PW-1 further goes to show that he issued legal notice and in reply to that the Advocate of O.P. No.-1 informed that the O.P. No.-1 would replace the alleged motor cycle with a new one and sought for time but later on when contacted the O.P. No.-1 showed no interest in this regard.
Though in the present case the O.P. No.-1, Dealer did not contest the case but Ext.-1 copy of money receipt submitted by PW-1 substantiate the factum of purchase of the alleged motor cycle by the complainant from O.P. No.-1 Taranga Autombiles. PW-1 has also exhibited the copy of the reply given by the Advocate of O.P. No.-1 against his (PW-1) legal notice as Ext.-4. Perusal of said Ext.-4 clearly shows that the O.P. No.-1 could not hand over the R. C. card of the sold vehicle to the complainant as the Central Govt. stopped the registration of all BS IV Two wheeler for certain period. In the said Ext.-4 the learned Advocate also sought for time upto March/2021 for O.P. No.-1 for handing over the RC Card . At the same time it was also assured that after the said period the O.P. no.-1 would replace the alleged motor cycle with a new one including all oficial documents. The DW-1 on the other hand, in the evidence has not disputed the sale of the alleged motor cycle by the O.P. No.-1 to the complainant. It also has not been disputed that the O.P. No.-1 did not hand over the R.C. Card of the motorcycle to the complainant nor they did return the value of the motorcycle or did replace the same with a new one.
Thus, the aforesaid facts that have come out from the discussions of the materials on record clearly shows the disservice on the part of O.P. No.-1 towards the complainant and also the activities of O.P. No.-1 are nothing but unfair trade practice. As a result, we are of the considered opinion that the present case is quite maintainable and the complainant is entitled to get relief in the case. Accordingly, it is ordered that the Opposite Party No.-1, TARANGA AUTOMOBILES shall refund Rs.75,094/- (Rupees seventy five thousand ninety four) only with interest on the said amount @ 8% per annum from the date purchase till today. The O.P. No.-1 shall also pay an amount of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) to the complainant as compensation for mental agony, pain and harassment. The O.P. No.-1 shall further pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand ) to the complainant towards cost of litigation. The entire amount shall be payable within a period of 45 (forty five) days from today else additional interest @ 9% per annum would accrue on the entire amount from the date of judgment till realization of the amount. However, the complainant shall return the alleged motorcycle as and when he will be asked by the O.P. No.-1 Taranga Automobiles, if not already returned. With the above the case , accordingly, stands allowed on contest against O.P. No.-2 and exparte against O.P. Nos. 1 &3.
Judgment is delivered on this 31st day of August’2022 with our signature and seal.
