Andhra Pradesh

Kurnool

CC/81/2014

A.Shaikshavali Baig, S/o A.Khadar Baig - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Regional Transport Officer - Opp.Party(s)

A.Ramthulla Baig

20 Jul 2015

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/81/2014
 
1. A.Shaikshavali Baig, S/o A.Khadar Baig
4-89B, Beside BRR Nagar, Nandikotkur-518 491, Kurnool District
Kurnool
Andhra Pradesh
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Regional Transport Officer
H.No.11-67, O/o Deputy Transport Commissioner, B.Tandra Padu Village, Kurnool-518007
Kurnool
Andhra Pradesh
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. S.Nazeerunissa B.A., B.L., PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. S.Niranjan Babu, B.A, B.L., MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

THE DISTRICT CONSUMER’S FORUM: KURNOOL

Present: Sri.S.Niranjan Babu, B.A., B.L., President (FAC),

And

Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member

Monday the 20th day of July, 2015

C.C.No.81/2014

Between:

 

A.Shaikshavali Baig,

S/o A.Khadar Baig,

4-89B, Beside BRR Nagar,

Nandikotkur-518 401,

Kurnool District.                                                             …Complainant

 

-Vs-

                                                                       

The Regional Transport Officer,

O/o Deputy Transport Commissioner,

H.No.11-67,

B.Tandra Padu Village

Kurnool-518 007                                                           …OPPOSITE PARTY

 

This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.A.Ramthulla Baig, Advocate for complainant and Sri.K.Uma Hanumantha Rao, Advocate for opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.

                                                                                            ORDER

(As per Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, Lady Member,)

      C.C. No.81/2014

 

1.       This complaint is filed under section 11 and12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to direct the opposite party:-

 

  1. To return the renewed driving license by mentioning the words of Heavy Passenger Vehicle and Heavy Goods Vehicle.

 

  1. To pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards the loss of salary for not authorizing to drive the HPV/HGV with interest @24% per annum.

 

  1. To pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards the compensation for causing mental agony and hardship.

 

  1. To pass any other order or orders that are deem to be fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

 

 

2.    The facts of the complaint in brief run as follows:- The complainant is the lorry driver by driving the Heavy goods vehicle.  The complainant has Heavy Passenger Vehicle and Heavy Goods Vehicle and LMV driving license bearing No.DLRAP02100009072011 it was valid up to 20.01.2014.  on 20.01.2014 the complainant applied for Renewal of the said driving license by paying a sum of Rs.485/- to the opposite party vide receipt No.KRNLCCO049/16151 and handed over the original driving license to the opposite party.  On 28.03.2014 the complainant received his renewal driving license bearing No.411/21/KNL/1987 with errors and mistakes by mentioning the words only LMV transport, transport vehicle, it does not contain the words Heavy Passenger Vehicle and Heavy Goods Vehicle as mentioned in the previous driving license.  As a result, the police and other RTA Officials are not allowing the complainant to drive the Heavy Passenger Vehicle and Heavy Goods Vehicles.  He lost his employment and getting loss of Rs.15,000/- per month.  Therefore the complainant submitted his representation to the opposite party on 30.01.2014 and returned the original renewed driving license to carryout the mistakes, but the opposite party did not respond.  The complainant got issued legal notice to opposite party on 24.02.2014.  The opposite party gave reply stating that there is no provision to show the class of vehicles HPV/HGV in the license as per “3” Tier CFST.  But the police and RTA officials are not accepting this contention of opposite party.  The opposite party did not mentioned the words HPV/HGV in renewed driving license.  Due to the negligent act of opposite party the complainant has to loose his job and cause a lot of mental agony.  There is a deficiency of service on the part of opposite party.  Hence this complaint.

 

3.       The opposite party filed written version stating that the complaint is neither just nor maintainable either in law or on facts.  It is admitted that the complainant applied to renew the alleged driving license and paid fee on 20.01.2014.  The opposite party renewed the same and it is valid up to 19.01.2017.  As per the present driving license the complainant is authorized to drive LMV, transport and a transport vehicle includes all Heavy Passenger Vehicle and Heavy Goods Vehicle.  The earlier driving licenses are issued under “2” Tier CFST under the control of Transport Commissioner’s Office, Hyderabad.  The State Government Converted and upgraded and computerized into “3” Tier CFST dated 25.02.2013.  All the driving licenses are issuing under “3” Tier CFST and issued authorized to drive LMV, transport and transport vehicle.  The complainant can also drive all transport Heavy Passenger Vehicle and Heavy Goods Vehicle.  On receipt of legal notice, the opposite party gave a detailed reply dated 01.03.2014 and stated the same to the complainant. Nobody either Police or RTA Officials objected him.  The complainant filed a complaint with frivolous grounds with ulterior motive to get a wrongful gain.  There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party.  The complaint is liable to be dismissed.

 

4.       On behalf of complainant filed Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 are marked and sworn affidavit of complainant is filed. On behalf of opposite party filed Ex.B1 and Ex.B2 are marked and sworn affidavit is filed. Deposition of PW1 examined Sri.A.Shaikshavali Baig.

 

5.       Both sides filed written arguments.

         

6.       Now the points that arise for consideration are:

 

  1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?

 

  1. Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for?

 

  1. To what relief?

 

7.      POINTS i and ii:- Admittedly the complainant applied for renewal of his driving license by paying a sum ofRs.485/- to the opposite party. Ex.A1 is the photo copy of driving license bearing No.DLRAP02100009072011 and Ex.A2 is the photo copy of fee Receipt No.KRNLCCO049/16151, dated 20.01.2014.  The complainant in his sworn affidavit stated that the opposite party renewed the driving license by mentioning the words only LMV/transport, transport vehicle he did not mentioned the words HPV/HGV as mentioned in the previous driving license.  Ex.A3 is the photo copy of new renewed driving license No.411/21/KNL/1987 due to mistakes of opposite party, the Police and RTA Officials did not allow the complainant to drive the Heavy Passenger Vehicle and Heavy Goods Vehicle and he lost his job also.  The complainant made a representation to opposite party and returned his original renewed driving license.  The photo copy of representation is marked as Ex.A4. The complainant issued legal notice to opposite party.  The copy of notice is marked as Ex.A5 dated 24.02.2014.  The opposite party gave reply notice which is marked as Ex.A6 dated 01.03.2014.  The complainant is recall and cross examined by opposite party.

 

8.       It is the contention of opposite party that the opposite party renewed the complainant license and issued Ex.A3 original under section 2 (47) “Transport Vehicle” means a public service vehicle, a goods carriage, an educational institution bus or a private service vehicle, and under section 10 (2) (e) Transport Vehicle of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and it is valid up to 19.01.2017 and enforceable under the Act and the complainant is authorized to drive the LMV transport and all the transport vehicles (i.e.,) all HGV/HPV under the Act.  Ex.A1 (earlier driving license) is issuing under “2” Tier CFST under the control of Transport Commissioner’s Office, Hyderabad.  The State Transport Department Converted and upgraded and computerized into “3” Tier CFST dated 25.02.2013 and Section 10(2) clauses f, g, h are omitted by the Act No.54/1994 w.e.f., 14.11.1994 by deleting HGV & HPV in the act itself and substituted as transport vehicle.  Accordingly the new renewed driving license issued to the complainant and to othersNobody is objected as stated by the complainant.

 

          The complainant is recalled and cross examined by the counsel of opposite party.  The complainant admitted that LMV, HPV and HGV are called as transport vehicle and Ex.A3 is LMV and transport vehicle license.

 

9.       There is no dispute with regard to application of renewal of driving license and the said driving license is renewed and issued Ex.A3 under section 2 (47) under section 10 (2) (e) of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988  by mentioning LMV transport and transport vehicle and not mentioned HGV, HPV as mentioned in earlier driving license (Ex.A1).  According to the complainant because of not mentioning HGV/HPV in his driving license (Ex.A3), he lose his job and Police and RTA Official did not allow him to drive the HGV/HPV vehicle, it amounts to deficiency of service on the part of opposite party.  According to the contention of opposite party, the transport vehicle includes all the HGV/HPV vehicle, the complainant is authorize d to drive all the vehicles transport vehicle under section 2 (47) under section 10 (2) (e) of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.  The complainant also admitted the same in his cross examination.  During the pendency of case before the Forum, the complainant and the counsel for the complainant made a requisition letter to opposite party for issuance of duplicate driving license and the opposite party issued the same.  The requisition letter of complainant and his counsel are marked as Ex.B1 and Ex.B2.  Basing on the material on available on record and facts and circumstances of the case, we found there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party.  The complainant is not entitled for any reliefs as prayed in his complaint.

 

10.     In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.

 

          Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 20th day of July, 2015.   

          Sd/-                                                                                     Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                                                                PRESIDENT (FAC)

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

         Witnesses Examined

 

For the complainant:- PW1                                 For the opposite party:- Nil

 

List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-

 

Ex.A1          Photo copy of Driving License bearing No.DLRAP02100009072011.

 

Ex.A2          Photo copy of Fee Receipt No.KRNLCCO049/16151, dated

                   20.01.2014.

 

Ex.A3           Photo copy of New Renewed Driving License

                   No.411/21/KNL/1987.

Ex.A4          Photo copy of Representation Letter of the complainant dated

                   30.01.2014.

 

Ex.A5          Office copy of Legal Notice dated 24.02.2014.

 

Ex.A6          Photo copy of Reply Letter dated 01.03.2014.

 

PW1            Deposition of Sri.A.Shaikshavali Baig dated 12-12-2014            

 

List of exhibits marked for the opposite party:-  

 

Ex.B1          Request Letter of the complainant dated 11.05.2015 addressing to RTO, Kurnool.

 

Ex.B2          Request Letter of the Counsel of Complainant dated 11.05.2015 addressing to RTO, Kurnool.

 

          Sd/-                                                                                     Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                                                                PRESIDENT (FAC)

 

     // Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//

Copy to:-

 

Complainant and Opposite parties    :

Copy was made ready on                   :

Copy was dispatched on                    :

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. S.Nazeerunissa B.A., B.L.,]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. S.Niranjan Babu, B.A, B.L.,]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.