This complaint coming up before us for hearing on 30-04-14                                in the presence of Sri S. Rama Mohan Rao, advocate for complainant;                         Sri K.B. Prasad, advocate for 4^th opposite party; 5^th opposite party opposite party representing in person and opposite parties 1 to 3 remained absent and set exparte, upon perusing the material on record, and having stood over till this day for consideration this Forum made the following:-

O R D E R

Per Sri A. Hazarath Rao,  President:-      The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking a direction to the opposite parties 1 and 2 to pay the road tax of Rs.44,470/- from out of the amount lying with the 1^st opposite party; to pay interest @24% p.a., on Rs.54,544/- from 05-01-13 till handing over of the invoice, sale letter and temporary registration certificate to him; to return the balance of Rs.10,074/- lying with them; Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation and for costs.

2.   In brief the averments of the complaint are these:

          The 5^th opposite party is manufacturer of Maruthi cars.   The                         2^nd opposite party is authorised dealer of the 5^th opposite party and is having branch office at Tenali (OP1).   The 4^th opposite party granted prize fund money of Rs.3,00,000/- for promoting its business.   The 4^th opposite party through the 3^rd opposite party disbursed the said amount of Rs.3,00,000/- for purchase of Maruthi Suzuki Wagon R LXI car.   The complainant on                03-01-13 issued cheque for Rs.1,58,000/- to the 1^st opposite party for the remaining amount who inturn issued a receipt on 05-01-13.   The said amount of Rs.3,00,000/- plus Rs.1,58,000/- covered road tax; life insurance, extended warranty and extra accessories.   The opposite parties 1 and 2 failed to handover the invoice bill, sale letter, temporary registration certificate and road tax.   The complainant claimed interest @24% p.a., on Rs.54,544/- as the opposite parties 1 and 2 withheld amount without paying road tax and insurance.  The opposite parties 1 and 2 harassed the complainant by not handing over the concerned documents relating to the vehicle purchased by him and due to which the complainant is unable to ply vehicle.  The complainant on 12-03-13 issued a registered notice to the opposite parties 1, 3 and 4.  The opposite parties 1 and 3 though received notice kept quite.   The above conduct of the opposite parties 1 and 2 amounted to deficiency of service.   The complaint therefore be allowed.

3.   The opposite parties 1 to 3 remained exparte.

4.    The contention of the 4^th opposite party in nutshell is hereunder:

          The complainant did not disclose any dispute between the 4^th opposite party and the complainant.   The complainant impleaded the 4^th opposite party unnecessarily though did not sought any relief.   The complaint therefore may be dismissed with exemplary costs of Rs.10,000/- u/s 26 of the Consumer Protection Act.

5.   The 5^th opposite party sent written statement through post requesting this Forum to decide the complaint on merits.   The contention of the                5^th opposite party in brief is hereunder:

          The complainant has booked and purchased a vehicle after mutually settling terms with the opposite parties 1 and 2.   The 5^th opposite party did not receive any consideration from the complainant and as such there is no privity of contract with the complainant.   The 5^th opposite party sells its vehicles to its authorised dealers under dealership agreement against                   C-form.   The 5^th opposite party is not at all responsible for alleged delay in delivery of documents to the complainant.   The 5^th opposite party has no control over the affairs of the opposite parties 1 and 2.   The complainant has no locus standi to file the complaint against the 5^th opposite party.   The               5^th opposite party did not commit any deficiency of service.   The complaint therefore may be dismissed with costs.

6.  Exs.A-1 to A-10 on behalf of the complainant were marked. 

7.   Now the points that arose for consideration in this complaint are:

          1.  Whether the opposite parties 1 and 2 committed deficiency of                          service?

          3.  Whether the complainant is entitled to claim damages and if so to                              what amount?

          4.  To what relief?

8.   POINT No.1:-   The opposite parties 1 and 2 by remaining exparte corroborated complainant’s case as mentioned in the complaint and complainant’s affidavit.   The opposite parties 1 and 2 gave Ex.A-4 quotation for Rs.5,09,536/- which included life tax, insurance and extended warranty besides facilities and logistics.   The opposite parties 1 and 2 received Rs.1,58,000/- by way of cheque from the complainant on 03-01-13 and issued the original of Ex.A-5 on 05-01-13. The opposite parties 1 and 2 delivered the vehicle Wagon R LXI with LPG to the complainant.  It is the case of the complainant that the opposite parties 1 and 2 did not pay road tax, insurance and did not furnish temporary registration certificate.   After receiving the entire consideration the opposite parties 1 and 2 are under an obligation to pay road tax, insurance and furnish temporary registration certificate.  The opposite parties 1 and 2 committed deficiency in service in not furnishing the above.   We therefore opine that the opposite parties 1 and 2 committed deficiency in service and answer this point against the opposite parties 1 and 2.

9.   POINT No.2:-    The complainant claimed Rs.1,00,000/- as damages towards mental agony, and depriving his right to ply the vehicle on road as seen from relief portion.   The complainant did not whisper any reason for claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- in the complaint.   But in his affidavit the complainant mentioned that he claimed damages of Rs.1,00,000/- due to inconvenience caused by the opposite parties 1 and 2 in earning income and depriving his right to ply the vehicle.   Any person purchases a vehicle to use it for his necessities.   In this case the opposite parties 1 and 2 deprived the complainant from using the vehicle by not handing over the temporary registration certificate, road tax and by not paying insurance though received from him and it amounted to harassment as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the complainant.

10.   In Kumari Femy and others vs. Dr. Kavitha V.K. and others (2013 (1) CPR 85 (NC) it was held

            “Even in a case where the allegation of medical negligence is established to the satisfaction of the concerned consumer forum, the quantum of compensation, payable to the victim, would need to be determined on the basis of the nature of the injury or loss.   It has to be commensurate with the loss or injury suffered.   It cannot be arbitrary, imaginary or remote to the cause.   The law on this subject is well enunciated”.

11.    The complainant did not mention the loss of income on account of not plying the vehicle for his use.   It can therefore be said that the complaint is lacking particulars for grant of compensation.   As already observed the opposite parties 1 and 2 caused harassment to the complainant by not handing over the relevant documents in order to enable the complainant to use the vehicle.   Under those circumstances, awarding Rs.20,000/- as compensation in our considered opinion will meet ends of justice.   We therefore answer this point accordingly in favour of the complainant.

12.  POINT No.3:-   

The complainant did not seek any relief against the opposite parties              3 to 5.  The complainant did not allege anything against the 4^th opposite party.  The complainant impleaded the 4^th opposite party unnecessarily as rightly contended by its learned counsel. 

13.  There is no privity of contract between the complainant and the                       5^th opposite party as rightly contended by it.   The complainant did not claim any relief against the 5^th opposite party for the reasons best known to him.   The complainant also did not claim any relief against the 3^rd opposite party.   The complaint can therefore be dismissed against the opposite parties 3 to 5.

14.    In view of above findings, in the result the complaint is partly allowed as indicated below:

1. The opposite parties 1 and 2 are directed to pay road tax and life insurance to the vehicle sold by them to the complainant under the original of Ex.A-2 within two weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
2.  The opposite parties 1 and 2 in the alternative are directed to return Rs.54,544/- (towards life tax) and Rs.14,050/- (towards insurance) together with interest @9% p.a., from 05-01-13 to the complainant in case they are not willing to pay road tax and insurance. 
3. The opposite parties 1 and 2 are directed to furnish invoice, sale letter and temporary registration certificate within two weeks from the date of receipt of the order. 
4. The opposite parties 1 and 2 are directed to pay Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) to the complainant as compensation.
5. The opposite parties 1 and 2 are directed to pay Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards costs to the complainant.
6. The claim against the 3^rd opposite party is dismissed without costs.
7. The complainant is directed to pay costs of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) each to the opposite parties 4 and 5 as claim against them is dismissed.
8. The opposite parties 1 and 2 are directed to deposit the above said amounts within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

Typed to my dictation by Junior Stenographer, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 6^th day of May, 2014.

Sd/-XXX                          Sd/-XXX                                          Sd/-XXX

      MEMBER                            MEMBER                                 PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For opposite parties:    NIL                                                                          

                                                                                                                      Sd/-XXX

                                                                                              PRESIDENT

NB:   The parties are required to collect the extra sets within a month after receit of this order either personally or through their advocate as otherwise the extra sets shall be weeded out.