Ld. Advocate(s)
For Complainant: Raj Kumar Mondal
For OP/OPs : Abhinandan Biswas
Date of filing of the case :24.02.2022
Date of Disposal of the case :28.12.2023
Final Order / Judgment dtd.28.12.2023
Some dispute over non delivery of the documents of Motor Vehicle tractor. Led the complainant to file this case. The concise fact of the case is that the complainant Ramprasad Saha purchased from the OP no. 1 the proprietor Subrata Automobile Pvt. Limited Authorised Dealer Honda Motorcycle and Scooter Pvt. Ltd. Palpara More P.S. Kotwali Dist. Nadia on 22.08.2018 having Engine no. JD49EU3165294 chassis no. ME4JF499FJU043329. The market value of the said vehicle was Rs. 81,725/- against which the complainant paid to the OP no. 1 Rs. 29,970/- as down payment on condition that OP no. 1 will hand over registration certificate and insurance documents of the said vehicle. Thereafter, the complainant asked the OP no. 1 to issue the said documents and even threatened the complainant to kidnap the school going son along with his wife. Complainant lodged a G.D bearing no. G.D.E NO. 826/2019 at Kotwali Police Station. Subsequently, the complainant served legal notice through his Ld. Adv Rajkumar Mandal 13.07.2019 which the OP received and replied through his Adv to settle the dispute amicably after paying the total due amount . So the OP no. 1 has caused deficiency in service. Suddenly, OP no. 2 the Manager Sri Ram City Union Finance Limited G.P. Auto Centre Second Floor P.S Kotwali, P.O Krishnagar, Nadia sent massage to the complainant claiming the dues after the long period from the date of purchase against the same, the complainant reply through his advocate but they did not reply. Suddenly, on 16.09.2019 OP no. 2 sent the massage demanding the said money.
OP no. 1 has been continuously harassing and threatening the complainant. Due to want of registration certificate and insurance policy the complainant could not use the said scooter. Subsequently the complainant again sent the legal notice on 07.02.2022 to OP no. 1 and OP no. 2 demanding the said documents lastly OP no. 2 demanded Rs. 1,00,775/- from the complainant but complainant is willing to pay the actual due of Rs. 58,255/-. So the present case is filed for redressal of his grievance . The cause of action for the present case arose on 13.07.2019 and subsequent date till the filing of this case. Complainant prayed for an award with the direction to OP no. 1 to deliver the registration certificate and insurance policy of the said vehicle, the direction to the OP no. 2 to accept the actual due of Rs. 58,255/- and compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- for mental pain and agony and cost of this case.
OP no. 1 contested the case by filing W/V where in they denied the major allegation. OP no. 1 challenged the case on the ground that it is not maintainable and barred by limitation and bad for defect of parties
The positive defence of case of OP no. 1 Subrata Automobile Pvt Ltd in brief is that the complainant sent a legal notice on 13.07.2019 against which the OP no. 1 replied stating inter alia that registration certificate and insurance policy of the said vehicle are lying with OP no. 1 and requested to settle the dispute amicably which the complainant admitted. On 16.02.2022 the government official informed the OP no. 1 on 07.02.2022 regarding the said documents. OP no. 1 is not now demanding any due as Shriram city Union Finance Ltd (OP 2) has already disbursed the said amount . The registration paper of the vehicle purchased by the complainant are ready to hand over at the office of the OP no. 1. OP authority asked to visit OP no. 1 office and collect the vehicle documents i.e insurance tax receipt , number plat, registration certificate at the earliest but the complainant did not visit to the OP no. 1.
OP no. 1 prayed for dismissed of this case with cost.
As per the order no. 7 dtd. 16.09.2022 the case was decided to be heard ex-parte against the OP no. 2.
The conflicting pleadings of the party persuaded this Commission to ascertain the following points for determination.
Points for Determination
Point No.1.
Whether the case is maintainable in its present form and prayer.
Point No.2.
Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.
Point No.3.
To what other relief if any the complainant is entitled to get.
Decision with Reasons
Point No.1.
This point relates to ascertainment as to maintainability of the case. Although the OP no. 1 challenged the case on different legal points in regards of evidence or argument. OP no. 1 could not produce sufficient material or Learned defence counsel did not advance any argument as to the legality and validity of this case. However, after perusing the pleading of the parties and the evidence in the case record. The commission is of the view that the case is not bad for defect of parties, not barred by limitation and maintainable in its present form and prayer.
Accordingly, points no. 1 is decided in favour of the complainant.
Point no.2 and 3.
Both the points are very closely inter linked with each other and as such this was taken up together Both the points are very closely interlinked with each other and as such these are taken up together for brevity and convenience of discussion.
The complainant in order to substantiate the case adduced evidence in the form of affidavit- in- chef where in they categorically stated about the purchase of the said scooter and payment of money of Rs. 29,970/- and that the balance sum of Rs.88,255- was due.
The evidence of PW1 also supported the case made out in the complaint.
It is admitted that complainant purchased a vehicle from OP no. 1 through finance of OP n. 2. Since admitted fact need not be prove so let us see March forward to the other aspect of this case.
OP no. 2 neither filed any WV no adduced any evident to establish as to how much amount of money is due from the complaint.
OP no. 2 neither filed any W/V nor adduced any evidence to establish as to how much amount of money is due from the complainant so the allegation as regards non delivery of the vehicle after payment of initial sum of RS. 29,970/- stands unchallenged and undiscarded.
It is also a matter to considered that the contesting OP no. 1 did not cross examination PW1 in regard to specific evidence for money paid and amount due for purchasing disputed scooter .
Complainant also proved one G.D NO. 826 dtd 12.07.2019 about the threats by some unknown person who are in the service of Honda Motorcycle and Scooter Pvt Ltd.
The said allegation also stands un challenged as the Ops did not cross examination to PW1 to that effect .
It is evident from the pleading of OP No. 1 that he is willing to hand over the said documents as the OP No. 2 has disbursed the same amount.
Thus the said contention of the OP No. 1 clearly established that OP no. 2 paid the money to OP no. 1 and as such the complainant has no obligation to pay the money as claimed. On the contrary the evidence in the case record suggest that complainant is willing to pay the actual due amount but the Ops unnecessarily dragged the matter for the long time by not handing over the registration certificate, insurance certificate and other documents relating to the said vehicle for a long time which tantamount to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service .
Complainant therefore be compensated for the harassment and mental pain and agony cause to him by the Ops.
Thus having assessed the entire evidence on the case record and in the light of the discussion made here in above vis-a – vis the observation made here in above commission comes to finding that the complainant successfully proved the case against the Ops.
Consequently, point no. 2 and 3 are answered in favour of the complainant .
Accordingly, the complaint case succeeds on contest with cost.
Hence,
It is
Ordered
that the complaint case No. CC/19/2022 be and the same is allowed on contest against OP no. 1 and ex-parte against OP no. 2 with cost. Complainant do get the award with the direction to the OP no. 1 to hand over the registration certificate and insurance policy of the said scooter having engine no. JF49EU3165294 , Chassis no. ME4JF499FJU043329 and model no. SCV125SJ2ID/ GRAZIA( DISC) to the complainant, Rs. 25,000/- ( Rupees Twenty five thousand) towards compensation for harassment, mental pain and agony and unfair trade practice, Rs. 5,000/- ( Rupees five thousand) towards cost of litigation
The OPs are directed to pay Rs.30,000/-(Rupees thirty thousand) and the aforesaid documents to the complainant within the 30 days the from the date of passing final order failing which the entire award money shall carry an interest at the rate of 8% p.a. and Rs. 100/- ( Rupees One hundred )per day for not delivery of the said documents, if the aforesaid order is not carried out.
Complaint is directed to pay Rs. 60,000/- (Rupees Sixty thousand) to the OP no. 2 against the said actual amount due at the time of delivery of the said documents by the OP no. 1 and payment of the awarded money.
All Interim Applications (I.A) stand hereby disposed of.
D.A to note in the trial register.
The case is accordingly disposed of.
Let a copy of this final order be supplied to both the parties at free of costs.
Dictated & corrected by me
........................................................
PRESIDENT
(Shri HARADHAN MUKHOPADHYAY,)
….................................................
PRESIDENT
(Shri HARADHAN MUKHOPADHYAY,)
I concur,
........................................ ......
MEMBER
(NIROD BARAN ROY CHOWDHURY)
