By. Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:-
The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 for an Order directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.10,000/- with 6% interest to the complainant being the amount received from the complainant on 29.07.2013 by the 1st opposite party and also to pay Rs.8,000/- as compensation to the complainant and cost of the proceedings.
2. Brief of the complaint:-As per the advertisement of 1st opposite party that the Autorickshaw bearing Registration No. KL 18 B 1548 will be auctioned in public auction, the complainant remitted Rs.450/- as price with 1st opposite party. On 29.07.2013, the vehicle was put to public auction and the complainant being the highest bidder, the 1st opposite party fixed the sale in the name of complainant for a sum of Rs.18,000/-. On the same day, the complainant remitted Rs.10,000/- as advance and the 1st opposite party gave receipt for the same. The 1st opposite party instructed the complainant that the balance amount of Rs.8,000/- is to be paid within 45 days from the date of sale and on such remittance, the ownership of the vehicle will be given in the name of complainant. So on 09.09.2013, the complainant went to the 1st opposite party’s office to pay the balance sum of Rs.8,000/- and to receive the vehicle, the 1st opposite party informed the complainant that the permission to change the ownership and other formalities are not received from the 2nd opposite party. The vehicle is kept in open place and the vehicle is subjected to rust during these period. It is due to the deficiency of service and lazy approach from the part of opposite parties, the complainant could not take the vehicle. Aggrieved by this, the complaint is filed.
3. On receipt of complaint, notice was issued to opposite parties and opposite parties appeared before the Forum and filed version. In the version, the opposite parties contented that since the auction sale price of the vehicle is below 50% of the upset price, in order to confirm the auction sale, the 1st opposite party send recommendation to the chief conservator of Forests, Northern Division. The chief conservator of Forests, Northern Division Kannur send recommendation to Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forest as per file No. A-5/6800/14 on 12.09.2013 and this Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests on 29.01.2014 had sent recommendation to the State Government for approval and confirmation. So far confirmation received from Government. So that is the reason for not giving vehicle to the complainant and there is no deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties.
4. On perusal of complaint, documents and versions, the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties?
2. Relief and cost?.
5. Point No.1:- The complainant filed proof affidavit and is examined as PW1 and documents are marked as Ext.A1 and A2. The 1st opposite party also filed proof affidavit and is examined as OPW1 and documents are marked as Ext.B1 to B13. Ext.A1 is the Receipt issued by 1st opposite party to the complainant on remittance of Rs.10,000/- towards sale price. Ext.A2 is the application given by the complainant on 29.10.2013 to the 1st opposite party for taking immediate steps for the confirmation of auction sale in the name of complainant. On perusal, it is found that the auction and remittance of Rs.10,000/- was done on 29.07.2013. The application for the confirmation was given on 29.10.2013 ie after 3 months of auction. The complaint is filed on 18.06.2014 ie after 10 months of auction. But as per Ext.B10 document, it is seen that the auction sale is confirmed by the department only on 23.09.2014. So the confirmation is made after 1 year and 2 months of auction. So the Forum found that there is inordinate delay in giving confirmation of the auction sale in the name of complainant from the part of opposite parties. Normally when a vehicle is not used for more than 14 months and especially when it is kept in open place, the vehicle will be subject to rust in all parts. The complainant apprehended the problem of rust long back at the time of giving application for confirmation on 29.10.2013 itself. But opposite parties did not take immediate steps to give confirmation to the complainant within a specified time. At last the confirmation is given by the opposite parties after 4 months of filing this complaint. The complaint is filed for the return of advance amount of Rs.10,000/- with interest and compensation. The complainant is not ready to take the vehicle at the belated stage, especially when the vehicle is subjected to rust. No such prayer in the complaint also and it is not just and proper to direct the complainant to take the vehicle now. On perusal of entire evidences the Forum found that there is inordinate delay in getting the confirmation from the higher authorities from the side of opposite parties, which resulted deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties. Whatever the reasons stated by the opposite parties, the matter is delayed for months which caused much hardships to the complainant. The Point No.1 is found accordingly.
6.Point No.2:- Since the Point No.1 found in favour of complainant, the complainant is entitled to get cost and compensation. The Point No.2 is decided accordingly.
In the result, the complaint is allowed and the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only to the complainant with 6% interest from 29.07.2013 till payment and to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) only as compensation and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand) only as cost of the proceedings. The opposite parties shall comply the Order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 29th day of May 2015.
Date of Filing:18.06.2014.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:-
PW1. Pocker. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:-
OPW1. P. Dhaneshkumar. District Forest Officer, South Wayanad.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Cash Receipt. dt:29.07.2013.
A2. Copy of Application. dt:29.10.2013.
Exhibits for the opposite parties:-
B1. Auction advertisements published in Kerala Gazette.
B2. Copy of complainant sign as Tenderer.
B3. Copy of Letter. dt:13.08.2013
B4. Copy of letter. dt:12.09.2013.
B5. Copy of Letter. dt:29.01.2014.
B6. Copy of Letter. dt:09.01.2014.
B7. Copy of Letter. dt:15.02.2014.
B8. Copy of Letter. dt:31.03.2014.
B9. Copy of Government Order. dt:12.09.2014.
B10. Copy of Letter. dt:23.09.2014.
B11. Copy of Government Order. dt:25.02.2009.
B12. Copy of Government Order. dt:30.11.2009.
B13. Copy of Valuation Report.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
a/-
