DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II U.T. CHANDIGARH =========== Complaint Case No : 450 OF 2011 Date of Institution : 22.09.2011 Date of Decision : 27.07.2012 Universal Disabled Care Taker Social Welfare Society (Regd.), Village Padiala, Tehsil Kharar, District SAS Nagar, Mohali (Punjab), through its Chief Functionary Sh. Shamsher Singh. ---Complainant V E R S U S The Autopace Network Pvt. Ltd., Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh, through its Managing Director. ---Opposite Party BEFORE: SH. LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT SMT. MADHU MUTNEJA MEMBER SH.JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU MEMBER Argued By: None for Complainant. Sh. Devinder Kumar, Proxy Counsel for Sh.P.K.Kukreja, Counsel for OP. PER MADHU MUTNEJA, PRESIDING MEMBER [1] The instant complaint relates to alleged deficiency in service by the OP, as they have failed to supply the relevant documents to the Complainant, at the time of sale of vehicle. Briefly stated, the Complainant is a Society registered under the name of “Universal Disabled Care Taker Social Welfare Society”, which had purchased a Maruti Versa Van from the OP by making full payment. The said vehicle was purchased by making down payment of Rs.91,520/-. Thereafter, full and final payment of Rs.2.90 lacs was made, by taking loan. The Complainant has alleged that at the time of possession, no document regarding the purchase of the van in question were handed over to them. The staff of the OP had stated that the documents will be handed over after few days. Thereafter, the Complainant repeatedly requested the staff of the OP orally on telephone, as well as in writing to hand over the documents, but nothing has been handed over to them. Due to this, the Complainant has failed to use the vehicle properly and get the same registered. The Complainant has expressed the fear that there could be further problems in registering the vehicle and it would have to pay a huge amount in the form of fine due to the fault and negligence of the OP. The Complainant had even sent a legal notice dated 26/5/2010, through registered A.D., to the OP, but the OP failed to hand over the documents to it. The Complainant has, thus, filed this complaint, with a prayer that the OP be directed to supply all the documents of the Maruti Versa Van sold to the Complainant i.e. Sale Letter, Form No. 21 and 22 and other documents, which are necessary for the registration of the vehicle, as well as pay compensation and costs of litigation. [2] Complainant led evidence in support of their contentions. [3] After admission of the complaint, notices were sent to the OP. Summons were issued to OP. However, OP refused to accept the summons; hence, they were proceeded against exparte on 09.11.2011, and the case was fixed for arguments. After hearing the learned counsel for the Complainant, the case was reserved for orders on 22.11.2011. [4] In the meantime, the Opposite Party filed Revision Petition No. 11 of 2011 under Section 17(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, before the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.T. Chandigarh. The Hon’ble State Consumer Commission after giving notice to the Complainant and hearing both the parties, set-aside the order dated 09.11.2011 passed by this Forum, wherein the Opposite Party was proceeded ex-parte, subject to payment of costs of Rs.2,000/-. The Opposite Party was also granted permission to file reply and evidence in the form of affidavit(s) along with documents, on which it relies upon to prove its case, after paying the costs. [5] After costs were paid by the Opposite Party to the Complainant, the matter was fixed for re-hearing. Thereafter, the Opposite Party filed reply. [6] The Opposite Party in reply had admitted sale of vehicle to the Complainant. Opposite Party has also submitted that all documents were delivered to the Complainant. Initially, all documents were in the name of M/s Kotak Mahindra as hypothecation was from Kotak Mahindra. Subsequently, on the request of the Complainant, the documents were changed with hypothecation to Tata Capital and delivered to it on 11.11.2009 after change of hypothecation. Opposite Party has stated that all documents required by the Complainant were supplied to it in time and duplicate sets were sent to it through registered post (proof as per annexures). Further, as per the information of the Opposite Party, the vehicle has covered many thousands of kilometers and is under regular use as per the requirements of the Complainant. The history of the vehicle is at Annexure R-10. In the affidavit of Sh. Nitin Mehan, Managing Director, Auto Pace Network Pvt. Limited, the averments in the reply have been reiterated. It has also been stated that the Complainant is a commercial organization and the vehicle was purchased by the Complainant with the sole motive of earning profits for the Society. The Complainant has maintained a number of vehicles and hence, this complaint is beyond the scope of this Forum. Opposite Party has also stated that the annexures placed on record by the Complainant are procured documents and they have not signed the A.D. card. The documents for the vehicle were delivered to the Complainant as per its requirement well in time (Annexure R-1 to R-4). Opposite Party has therefore, prayed for the dismissal of the complaint. [7] We have heard the learned counsel for the Opposite Party and have gone through the documents on record. As the Complainant failed to appear on the last date of hearing i.e. 26.07.2012, only the arguments of the learned counsel for the Opposite Party were heard. The complaint was thus, proceeded to be disposed of on merits under Rule 4(8) of the Chandigarh Consumer Protection Rules, 1987, read with Section 13(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended upto date), vide order dated 26.07.2012. [8] As per the complaint, the main grievance of the Complainant is that despite making full payment as against the vehicle to the OP, the OP has only handed over the van, but failed to provide the relevant necessary documents, which are necessary for the registration of vehicle before the competent authority. The van has not even been insured, due to non availability of relevant documents. [9] The Opposite Party in reply has stated that the documents were handed over to the Complainant well in time. Initially, the hypothecation was in the name of M/s Kotak Mahindra and subsequently, at the request of the Complainant, the hypothecation was also changed to the name of Tata Capital Limited. The Opposite Party has also brought proof of delivery of the documents to the Complainant by way of registered post. [10] It seems that the documents have been misplaced by the Complainant. The Complainant had also averred in the complaint that two years have passed since the date of purchase and the machinery of the van would have deteriorated due to non-usage. But the Opposite Party has placed on record Annexure R-10 which is the job card dated 9.9.2010 on which the mileage of the vehicle has been shown as ‘10020’. It is now almost two years since that date and it is not possible that the vehicle is not being used. [11] Looking at the peculiar situation, we can only dispose of this complaint by giving directions to the Opposite Party to provide duplicate documents once again to the Complainant, so that the Complainant is able to get its vehicle registered with the licensing authority. Any papers required to be signed by the Opposite Party to facilitate the registration process be also signed. Any fines/fees payable by the Complainant to the licensing authority will be paid by the Complainant itself and will not be the liability of the Opposite Party. Opposite Party is directed to provide the said papers to the Complainant, within 30 days of receipt of this order. The case is disposed off accordingly. No costs. [12] Certified copies of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. Announced 27.07.2012 Sd/- (LAKSHMAN SHARMA) PRESIDENT Sd/- (MADHU MUTNEJA) MEMBER Sd/- (JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU) MEMBER
| | MRS. MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT | MR. JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU, MEMBER | | 
