DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C. C. NO- 308/2016
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
24.05.2016 30.05.2016 09.10.2018
Complainant :- 1. Debabrata Mondal
Vill- Motiganj (Bagdah Road),
P.O + P.S- Bongaon, Dist- North 24 Parganas
Pin- 743235
=Vs=
Opposite Parties :- 1. The Manager
Of Satyam Automobile Chandpara Bazar,
Opp Chandpara Petrol Pump
P.S- Gaighata, Kol- 743245
2. The Director
Of Hero Moto Corp Ltd.
34, CFommunity Centre,
Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar,
New Delhi- 110057 India
P R E S E N T :- Sri. Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay………..…..President.
:- Smt. Silpi Majumder ……………………………………Member.
Final Order
This complaint is filed by the Complainant u/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice against the OPs as the OPs did not supply the Blue Book , actual Engine and Chasis number till filing of this complaint.
The brief fact of the case of the complainant is that he purchased one motor cycle from the OP by making payment of Rs. 64,280/- on 04.05.2015. At the time of purchase the Op assured him to supply all the relevant documents regarding the said motor cycle including Blue Book (smart card, tax token and insurance etc.) . After two months the OP supplied one document for installation of the number plate to him, but he found that the engine number was wrongly mentioned in the said document and the complainant informed the matter to the OP immediately. OP told the complainant to install the number plate first and the engine will be rectified latter on. But after lapse of one year engine number was not changed and correct documents not supplied to the complainant by the OP along with Blue Book inspite of assurance. OP was requested by the complainant on several occasions to supply the correct Blue Book containing correct engine number but the OP did not pay any heed to it. For this reason the purchased motor cycle remained inactive at his residence for a long period for which the engine and battery of the vehicle gradually going damaged.
Cont…………………..2
:2:
According to the complainant non-supply of the documents as mentioned above by the OP can be termed as unfair trade practice as well as deficiency in service. Due to such negligence of the OP, complainant has been suffering from physical harassment and mental agony for which he is not at all responsible. As hois grievance have not been redressed by the OPs before coming to this Ld. Forum, finding no other alternative the complainant has approached before this Ld. Forum by filing this complaint praying for direction upon the OPs either to supply Blue Book containing actual engine and chasis number or replace the new motor cycle or refund the amount as paid by him during its purchase along with compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,000/- due to physical harassment, mental agony and litigation cost of Rs. 2,000/-.
The petition of complaint has been contested by the OP 1 by filing Written Version wherein it is mentioned that the complainant purchased the motor cycle on 04.05.2015. When the complainant went to the Barasat RTO for fitting the spare parts then it was stressed out that due to wrong printing the number of the engine it was shown wrongly, but at that moment the complainant did not make any complaint to the concerned RTO for correction of the same. The vehicle RTO is empowered to correct the same but the complainant without taking any appropriate step with the concerned authority he started to create pressure upon this OP. After knowing the grievance of the complainant the OP 1 requested to get his motor cycle registered through the OP 1, but the complainant did neither take any step nor extend cooperation with this OP deliberately to solve this minor problem. To escape from his own intentional latches the complainant made a complaint before the Directorate of Consumer Affairs and Fair Business Practices, Govt. of West Bengal for necessary correction in the Blue Book. After getting notice from the said Office the personnel of the OP went at the said Office on 29.03.2016 along with written submission, but the complainant left that place without any discussion and since then the OP 1 repeatedly communicated with the complainant over telephone for rendering all sorts of possible assistance to the complainant for correction of the said minor mistake caused by the RTO. During communication of the process for correction in the Blue Book the Complainant without making any communication with the OP 1 filed this case making false allegation against this OP. The OP 1 requested the concerned RTO at Barasat for removal of such defect and after removal the defect RTO Barasat supplied the rectified Blue Book to the OP 1 and accordingly the copy of the same was sent to the complainant in his Whatsapp Number. The complainant did not want to meet with this OP for receiving the same personally. However the OP 1 provided required service to the complainant and his motor cycle is in well condition. Whatever the allegation of the complainant the same was not caused by show room like the OP 1. According to the OP 1 the complaint is not maintainable, rather it is vexatious and baseless. Prayer is made by the OP 1 for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary cost.
Cont…………………..3
:3:
The petition of complaint has been contested by the OP 2 by filing Written Version. But we cannot take any cognizance in respect of the said Written Version filed by the OP 2 as it is not supported by affidavit. In view of the reportable Judgment as well as the practice and procedure of the CP Act, as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme court in the Case of Dr. JJ. Merchant and Another Vs. Srinath Chaturvedi wherein it is observed that the petition of complaint as well as the defense version should be filed on affidavit along with related documents. For this reason we are not inclined to describe the W/V of the OP 2.
The complainant has adduced evidence on affidavit and BNA. The OPs did not adduce any evidence.
We have carefully perused the record, documents as submitted by the complainant, BNA filed by the complainant and heard argument at length advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the OP 1. On the date of argument the complainant was absent on calls. As the evidence of the complainant is on record, considering the same as well as other documents we are passing this Judgment. It is seen by us that the allegation of the complainant is that the OPs did not take any step to supply Blue Book of the questioned vehicle containing the actual engine and chasis number till filing of this complaint. The complainant has prayed for replacement of the questioned vehicle or refund of the amount as paid by him in case of failure to supply the abovementioned documents. The complainant did not adduce any iota of documentary evidence from where it is evident that the OPs are liable to supply the said documents to him as sought for. Therefore the complainant has failed to corroborate his claim and allegation by adducing cogent document is support of his contention. From the Written Version of the OP 1 it is evident that subsequently the concerned vehicle RTO corrected the rectified engine number of the vehicle and sent the same of the OP 1. Upon received the same the OP 1 remit the same in the Whatsapp number of the complainant. The OP 1 requested the complainant to make contact with the OP 1 for collection of the said documents, but without taking any positive initiative the complainant has filed this complaint praying for certain reliefs. As the complainant has failed to prove his case, hence the complaint does not succeed.
Hence it is ordered that the complaint is dismissed on contest against the OPs without any cost.
Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per the CPR, 2005.
Member President
Dictated & Corrected by
