Order No. -22 FINAL ORDER Dt.-04/12/2015
Sri Prabin Chettri, Member
Complainant’s case in brief is that he purchased TATA NANO vehicle from O.P.1 (ASR Automobiles), Authorised DSA of Lexican Motors, New Kranti Hat, P.O. Kranti Hat P.S.- Mal, Dist.- Jalpaiguri. The said vehicle has been financed by the Tata Motors Finance Ltd. (O.P.2). The complainant has paid Rs.65,000/- (Rs.55,000/- by cash on 08/12/2012 and Rs.10,000/- by cheque, dt.08/05/2013) to the ASR Automobiles (O.P.1) as down payment for the said vehicle, out of a total price of the vehicle of Rs.1,72,000/- and the rest amount was payable by installments of Rs.3225/- per month within 5 years. The complainant paid 12 numbers of installments of Rs.3,225/- each regularly to the O.P.2, (Tata Motors Finance Ltd.), as per agreement. As per agreement the O.P.1 (ASR Automobiles) was under the obligation to handover all necessary papers namely, registration book, insurance policy etc. to the purchaser/ complainant. But O.P.1 didn’t handover those papers to the complainant despite his repeated requests/ remainders. On 26/06/2014 complainant served legal notice upon O.P.1 for supply of necessary papers. But no fruitful result came out. The complainant had to suffer mental pain, agony, harassment and even financial loss due to the aforesaid act on the part of O.P.1. Hence the complainant has filed the case and prayed for reliefs mentioned in the petition of complaint.
O.P.1 (ASR Automobiles) didn’t appear despite service of notice. O.P.2 (Tata Motors Finance Ltd.) has contested this case by filing Written Version, wherein O.P.2 has denied and disputed the claims and contentions of the complainant. O.P.2 has categorically stated that there was no deficiency in service and or Unfair Trade Practice on their part, as O.P.2 is merely a financer and as such it has no liability of receiving or despatching the documents of the vehicle involved. O.P.2 has prayed for dismissal of the case.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION.
- Is the complainant a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act.1986?
- Was there any deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. as alleged?
- Is the case/application maintainable under law?
- Whether the complainant is liable to get reliefs/rewards as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
All points are taken up together for consideration and decision. The case is heard ex-parte against the O.P.1 (ASR Automobiles) as O.P.1 didn’t appear to contest this case after service of notice.
Seen and perused the pleadings of the parties which are supported by the affidavit, documents filed by the complainant and the Written Version filed by the O.P. We have also heard arguments advanced by both parties in full length.
The complainant purchased a Tata Nano Vehicle on installment basis through showroom namely ASR Automobiles Authorised DSA of Lexican Motors, on hire basis purchase agreement with Tata Motors Finance Ltd. after paying Rs.65,000/- as down payment to the dealer out of Rs.1,72,000/- and the remaining amount was financed by the O.P.2 this are admitted facts. So we have no hesitation on this point that the complainant is a consumer under C.P.Act 1986.
Furthermore, from the petition of complaint we find that this vehicle was purchased by the complainant for his personal use and not for commercial purpose and that this Forum has both territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction to hear this case. Therefore we find and hold that this case is maintainable under law.
Admittedly O.P.2 is a financer and O.P.1 is the dealer(DSA) of the vehicle in question. As financer, O.P.2 had/has no obligation to hand over the complainant the papers of the vehicle namely Registration book, Insurance policy etc. On the other hand O.P.1 being the dealer(DSA)/seller of the vehicle in question was/is in the legal obligation to handover the papers of the vehicle including Registration book, Insurance policy etc.to the purchaser namely the complainant soon after delivery of the vehicle to the customer/complainant. Therefore it is clear that the financer i.e. O.P.2 had no Deficiency in Service and/or Unfair Trade Practice. On the other hand as O.P.1 being the dealer(DSA)/- Seller of the vehicle in question had not handed over the relevant papers of the vehicle including Registration book, Insurance copy etc to the complainant after delivery of the vehicle in question and even not delivering said documents/papers to the complainant till date of filing of this case, the complianant had to suffer mental agony, pain, harassment etc for unavailable to ply his vehicle after purchase due to aforesaid negative activities of O.P.1 which acts certainly comes within the ambit of Deficiency in service and or Unfair Trade Practice.
It is to be mentioned here that O.P.1 didn’t contest the case despite service of notice, so, the contention of the complainant against O.P.1 for non-supply of relevant papers of vehicle as made in his petition of complaint which is supported by affidavit goes unchallenged.
In view of the above discussion we may safely come to the conclusion that only O.P.1 is guilty for Deficiency in Service and or Unfair Trade Practice.
Therefore the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as specified below.
All points are disposed of.
In the result the case/application succeeds.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
that the case is allowed exparte against O.P.1 with cost of Rs.2,000/-(Two Thousand) in part and dismissed on contest against O.P.2 without cost.
The O.P.1 is hereby directed to handover/deliver all relevant documents of the vehicle in question including Registration book, Insurance policy etc. to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order.
The complainant do get an award of Rs.5000/-(Five thousand) in the head of compensation, mental agony, pain, harassment etc.
The O.P.1 (ASR Automobiles, Authorised DSA of Lexican Motors) is hereby directed to comply the aforesaid direction and to pay the cost and the awarded sum of sum of Rs 5000 + Rs.2000 = Rs.7000/- (Seven Thousand) to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which O.P.1 shall have to pay Rs.50/- (Fifty) per day to the complainant till realisation and compliance of the direction and the complainant is at liberty to realise the entire amount and to compel O.P.1 to comply the direction regarding delivery of papers (Registration book, Insurance policy) etc of the vehicle in question by putting this order into execution in accordance with law.
Let copy of this final order be supplied free of cost forthwith to the parties/ their Ld. Advocates/agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/sent by general post, in terms of Rule 5(10) of West Bengal Consumer Protection Rules 1987.
