DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD

Dated this the 18^th day of April 2013

Present : Smt.Seena H, President

: Smt. Preetha.G. Nair, Member

: Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K, Member Date of filing: 10/10/2012

(C.C.No.189/2012)

S.Muhammed Jalaludheen Akbar,

S/o.C.R.Sherafudeen,

“Snehakood”, Hill View Nagar,

Kanjikode, Palakkad – 678 623 - Complainant

(By Adv.P.Gopinath)

V/s

The Regional Transport Officer,

Regional Transport Office,

Palakkad – 678 001

(By Party in Person ) - Opposite party

O R D E R

By Smt.SEENA.H, PRESIDENT

Complaint in brief:

Complainant purchased a Verito D6-Diesel car manufactured by Mahindra & Mahindra and delivered by M/s.ITL Motors Pvt.Ltd. on 3/10/11 for a price of Rs.6,68,912/-. As per the temporary registration No. allotted to the complainant, the vehicle was having a Chassis No.MAILSRHJHBZH 20922 and Engine No.DO58193. Subsequently the vehicle was registered by the opposite party and issued registration No. which is KL-09-AB-5678. As per the registration Certificate the Chassis No.is MAILSRJHBZH 20922 and Engine No. is DO58193.

The vehicle was insured with Reliance General Insurance Company. The complainant approached M/s.Kotak Mahindra Pvt.Ltd. with whom the complainant hold a hypothecation agreement for additional finance. On inspection by them, it was found that the complainant’s vehicle is having chassis No.BZH20912 and the Engine No.58423. On verification in the official website of Motor Vehicle Department, it was found that the vehicle with the above chassis No. and Engine No. is registered as KL-09-AB-5464 on 10/10/2011. Complainant contacted both the manufacturer and the dealer. Opposite party was bound to examine the chassis No. and Engine No. before registering the vehicle. Had he done the same, he would not have registered the vehicle. The complainant is not in a position to ply the vehicle as it holds a different chassis No. and engine No. The act of opposite party in not inspecting the vehicle before registration amounts to clear deficiency. Hence the complaint. Complainant prays for an order directing the opposite party to re-register the vehicle with the Engine No. and Chassis No. as seen on the vehicle and pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and cost of the proceedings.

Opposite party filed version contending the following:

A motor car bearing chassis number MAILSRHJHBZH20922 and Engine No.DO58193 purchased from M/s.ITL Motors Pvt.Ltd. Thrissur on 1/10/2011 was produced for registration by the complainant, the registered owner of the above vehicle, alongwith all the documents required as per the Rule 47 of Central Motor Vehicle Rule 1989 as follows:

1. Form 21 (sale certificate issued by the dealer of the vehicle)

2. Form 20 (The application for registration submitted by the purchaser of the vehicle)

3. Form 22 (The certificate issued by the manufacturer of the vehicle)

4. Temporary Certificate of Registration KL8/N TEMP 9839 (issued by the Registering authority, Thrissur)

5. Invoice (Form -8-B) issued by the dealer

6. Form 60 (filed by the petitioner)

7. Proof of Address (of the purchaser)

According to the inspection Report of the Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector, Palakkad the Chassis number, Engine number, Make, Type and Colour of the produced vehicle was found tally with the documents produced.

The Registering Authority issued Registration number KL-9AB 5678 to the motor car purchased by Sri.S.Mohammed Jalaludheen Akbar, bearing chassis number MAILSRHJHBZH20922 and Engine number DO58193 properly.

Any mistake while delivering the vehicle by the dealer after registration of several vehicles on a day, to the customers or taking delivery by the owner of a different vehicle after registration is beyond the responsibility of opposite party. There is no procedural lapse on the part of the opposite party on assigning the registration mark to the petitioner’s vehicle.

Hence the allegation of the registered owner is baseless and devoid of any merits and the same is liable to be dismissed.

The evidence adduced by the parties consists of their respective chief affidavits, Ext.A1 to A10 marked on the side of the complainant and Ext.B1 to B8 on the side of the opposite party. Opposite party cross examined as DW1.

Issues for consideration are

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

2. If so, what is the relief and cost complainant is entitled to ?

Issue No.1 & 2

The definite case of the complainant is that opposite party without proper inspection of the vehicle has registered the vehicle with a wrong chassis No. and engine No. complainant’s vehicle bear the engine No.DO58423 and chassis No. BZH20912. But as per the registration certificate the engine No. and chassis No. of the complainant’s vehicle is DO58193 and MAILSRHJHBZH20922. It was made known to the complainant only when it was inspected by M/s.Kotak Mahindra Pvt.Ltd. for providing additional finance. According to opposite party they have registered the vehicle after examination only.

Heard both parties and has gone through the entire evidence on record.

Though opposite party contended that they have registered the vehicle after inspection, it is seen that they have not disputed the fact that the actual engine No. and chassis No. of the complainant’s vehicle differs from that in the registration certificate. As per the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 Section 44, the vehicle has to be produced before the registering authority at the time of registration.

Section 44 read as follows:

Production of vehicle at the time of registration – The registering authority shall before proceedings to register a motor vehicle or renew the certificate of registration in respect of a motor vehicle, other than a transport vehicle, require the person applying for registration of the vehicle or, as the case may be, for renewing the certificate of registration to produce the vehicle either before itself or such authority as the State Government may by order appoint in order that the registering authority may satisfy itself that the particulars contained in the application are true and that the vehicle complies with the requirements of this Act and of the rules made thereunder.

Rules 96, of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules 1989 provides as follows:

1. Inspecting Officer : The Registering Authority or such authority as the Government may by order appointed shall inspect the vehicle as required by Section 44 of the Act.

2. Production of Vehicle for inspection : The vehicle shall be produced for inspection along with the required documents for registration, before the inspecting officer, for a comparative scrutiny of the particulars contained in the application with the physical features of the vehicle, and for ascertaining its fitness for use in public place.

3. Report of inspecting officer : The inspecting officer after making modifications deemed necessary in the particulars contained in the application, shall certify therein regarding the correctness of the entries and the fitness of the vehicle.

The said rules mandates physical examination of the vehicle by the inspecting officer. Moreover as per the rules the inspecting officer shall ensure the correction of the entries in the application also.

So even if there is any mistake in the entries in the application and other forms, the inspecting officer is the responsible officer for correcting the same.

Opposite party has produced Ext.B2 wherein the inspecting officer has certified that particulars in the application are true. We find that Ext. B2 is only a formal certification without physical examination of the vehicle. In Ext.B2 column No.22 it is stated chassis No. (Affix pencil print) No pencil print is seen attached. Inspecting officer has not noted the same also. It is true that the documents produced from the side of the complainant bears the wrong chassis No. and engine number. But that will not absolve the responsibility of the opposite party. This is the case wherein the principle of res ipsa loq uitor (Thing speaks for itself) applies. The act of opposite party clearly amounts to deficiency in service on their part.

In the result complaint allowed and we order the following:

1. Opposite party is directed to re-register the vehicle of the complainant with Engine No. and Chassis No. as seen in the vehicle i.e. Engine No.DO58423 & Chassis No.BZH20912.

2. Pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost of the proceedings.

3. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order, failing which complainant is entitled for 9percentage  interest per annum for the whole amount from the date of order till realization.

Pronounced in the open court on this the 18^th day of April 2013.

Sd/-

Seena H

President

Sd/-

Preetha G Nair

Member

Sd/-

Bhanumathi.A.K.

Member

APPENDIX

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant

Ext.A1 – Photocopy of the Registration Certificate of Vehicle No.KL-09-AB-5678

Ext.A2 – Copy of lawyer notice dated 10/8/12 issued to the opposite party,

manufacturer and dealer of the vehicle.

Ext.A3 – Photocopy of Temporary Registration Certificate issued by opposite

party Department

Ext.A4 – Photocopy of the Data Entry Sheet given by the opposite party office

at Thrissur

Ext.A5 – Photocopy of Form No.21 the Sale certificate

Ext.A6 – Photocopy of form No.22

Ext.A7 – Photocopy of the Insurance Certificate taken for the vehicle on

1/10/11

Ext.A8 – Notarized copy of the first page of the Service Book issued by Mahindra

& Mahindra

Ext.A9 - Photocopy of the flap of the key issued at the time of delivery of the

vehicle to the complainant

Ext.A10 - Photocopy of the Battery warranty card which is attached to the

Service Coupon booklet.

Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite party

Ext.B1 – Photocopy of Registration particulars of the vehicle

Ext.B2 – Photocopy of Form No.20 application for registration submitted by the

purchaser of the vehicle

Ext.B3 – Photocopy of Form No.21 Sale Certificate

Ext.B4 – Photocopy of Ration card of the complainant.

Ext.B5 – Photocopy of Form No.22, certificate issued by the manufacturer of

the vehicle

Ext.B6 – Photocopy of Temporary Registration Certificate of the vehicle

Ext.B7 – Photocopy of Invoice issued by ITL Motors to the complainant

dtd.1/10/11

Ext.B8 – Photocopy of Form No.60

Witness examined on the side of the complainant

Nil

Witness examined on the side of the opposite party

DW1 – Muhammed Najeeb.P.M.

Cost

Rs.1,000/- allowed as cost of the proceedings.