Orissa

Debagarh

CC/50/2019

Sanjay Kumar Sahoo, aged about 34 years/ S/o-Babaji Charan Sahoo - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Proprietor, Unitech Motors - Opp.Party(s)

17 Dec 2020

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION, DEOGARH

C.C NO- 50  /2020

Present;-      Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Smt. Jayanti Pradhan, Member(W) and Smt. Arati Das, Member.

Sanjay Kumar Sahoo, aged about  34 years,

S/O- Babaji Sahoo,

At-Gopabandhu Chowk,

P.O/P.S/Dist-Deogarh.                                                                                …..Complainant.

                                                                           Vrs.

1. The Propreitor,  

           Unitech Motors,

           At/-Rajamunda, Deogarh,

           PO/PS/Dist-Deogarh.

      2. The Regional Transport Officer

           At-R.T.O Office,Deogarh

           P.S/Dist-Deogarh.                                                                                   …..O.Ps

              

               Counsels -

               For the Complainant :                                      Nemo

               For the Opposite Party No-1 :                         Nemo

                      For the Opposite Party No-2 :                         Sr. H. N.Sahu (Authorised Person)

 

                                 DATE OF HEARING :10.12.2020, DATE OF ORDER ; 17.12.2020

 SRI DIPAK KUMAR MAHAPATRA,PRESIDENT:- Brief facts of the case is that, the Complainant on dtd.31.07.2017, has purchased YAMAHA Fascino two wheeler (Scooty) having Chassis No- ME1SE77F8G0242996 and Engine No-E3N8E0368706  having total on road price of Rs. 43,000/-. The Scooty was financed by the HDFC Bank,Deogarh Branch and the Complainant had paid Rs.25,000/- as down payment where the registration fees, Insurance fees and other related fees were included. The O.P-1 had provided the Retail invoice  and a copy of Ownership Record  and Data on the day of sale of the Scooty and he had promised to handover the Registration documents like Smart Card and R.C Particulars within 15 days of delivery of the Scooty but in vain. Though the Complainant has already paid the entire installment to the financier but No Due Certificate (NDC) could not be issued due to lack of registration documents. On dtd. 26.11.2018 when the Complainant asked the O.P-1 about the documents he replied that the documents have not been ready from RTO office and it will take more time. On dtd. 14.10.2019, the Complainant visited the office of the O.P-2 to confirm the matter by providing Chassis and Engine nos. of the Scooty but the staff of the O.P-2 denied to have such paper relating to the Scooty, submitted by the O.P-2 with them for registration. The Financier  is also compelling the Complainant to submit the registration certificate etc to issue NDC in his favour. Due to non availability of the smart card and R.C particulars, the Complainant facing a lot of problems in R.TO/M.V.I/Police checking and paying penalty.

 As per the O.P-1 he has submitted all the relevant documents like sale certificate,FormNo-21,22,Form-34 for HPA cancellation with the O.P-2 on dtd. 03.04.2017     while the RTO office was near Private Bus Stand in Deogarh Town. The O.P-1 has at the time of submitting the documents with the O.P-2 asked the concerned staff to issue him an acknowledgement of receipt but he denied to issue and stated that they usually have no time to do all this and they are not issuing any receipt to any dealer. So finding no way the O.P-1 left the place. But after receiving e-mail  from the O.P-2 he collected and submitted another set of the documents of the Scooty with the O.P-2 on dtd.30.09.2020. On asking the staff at the office of the O.P-2 stated that the  documents may have misplaced.

But according to the O.P-2 though the O.P-1 has deposited an amount of Rs.3879/- towards MV Tax, Registration Fees, HPA endorsement and other charges through online on dtd.31.03.2017 but he had not submitted the Sale certificate, Form No-20,21,22,Insurance certificate, Form-34 for HPA endorsement and adhaar/Voter ID before the O.P-2 for the registration of the vehicle. As per the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and office order of the Transport Commissioner, registration of vehicle of BS-IV category vehicles, the O.P-2 intimated the O.P-1 through e-mail on dtd.15.09.2020 and directed to submit all the relevant documents before the O.P-2 within dtd.25.09.2020 for completion of registration process of the vehicle before dtd. 30.09.2020 and the O.P-1 submitted the same on last day i.e. dtd. 30.09.2020.

POINTS OF DETERMINATION:-

1. Whether the Complainant is comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act-2019?
2. Whether the O.Ps has committed any Deficiency in Service to the Complainant?

From the above discussion we inferred that the Complainant comes under the purview of Consumers as he has purchased a new YAMAHA Fascino two wheeler (Scooty) from the O.P-1. The O.P-1 has deposited the registration fees to the O.P-2 through online payment system on the day of sale. The documents submitted by the O.P-1 soon after the sale, were misplaced in the hands of theO.P-2 for which the registration procedure is  delayed and the O.P-1 has taken extra pain to submit the relevant documents for the second time with the O.P-2 as soon as he received information from the O.P-2 through e-mail on dtd.15.09.2020 with a direction to submit all the relevant documents before the O.P-2 within dtd.25.09.2020. So the O.P-1can not be said to have committed any deficiency in service. Again though the registration of the said Scooty is done on dtd.30.09.2020, the smart card and R.C particulars were printed and despatched to address of the Complainant which received in the first week of December 2020     after a gap of two months which proves to be gross deficiency in services. From the above we conclude that the O.P-2 has committed Deficiency in Service as well as Unfair Trade Practice to the Complainant. The allegation against the O.P-1 is not proved. Hence we order as under:-

ORDER

The Complaint petition is allowed. The O.P-2 is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand)onlyas compensation, Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand ) for mental agony of the petitioner and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand ) as litigation expenses to the petitionerwithin 30 (Thirty ) days of receipt of this order failing which the O.P-2 is liable to pay penal interest of 9% per annum on the above amounts.

Office is directed to supply the free copies of the order to the parties receiving acknowledgement of the delivery of thereof.

Order pronounced in the open court today i.e. 17^th day of December, 2020 under my hand and seal of this Commission.

 

             I      agree,                                         I     agree,

           

          MEMBER(W).                                    MEMBER.                              PRESIDENT.

            Dictated and Corrected

               by me.

 

          PRESIDENT.