SRI BIJOY KUMAR DAS,PRESIDENT:-
Deficiency in service in respect of excess collection of Tax in connection to Register of the Vehicle of complainant are the allegations arrayed against the Op.
2. Complaint, in brief reveals that, Complainant to register his TATA HCV goods carrier vehicle produced the same before Op- Transport registering authorities, Kendrapara. The said vehicle was purchased on dt. 12.01.2018 from SAISUDHA MOTORS (Pvt.) Ltd. and Hypothecated with Indusind bank Ltd. Cuttack. It is alleged that Op-Registering Authorities received Rs. 54,220/- towards registration charges and granted money receipt vide No. OR29R180800000353 and Appl. No. OR 18081091320079 dtd. 10.08.2018. It is also alleged that, Op-Authority has taken an excess amount of Rs. 30,220/- from the complainant towards registration charge of the vehicle. Complainant repeatedly request the Op-authorities to refund the excess amount, though Op assured to refund the amount, but did not refund the amount, for which complainant issued an Advocate’s Notice to Op on dt. 19.10.2018 through Regd. Post with A.D. The complaint petition reveals that complainant has purchased the vehicle for maintaining his livelihood and such non-refund of excess amount caused financial loss and mental agony to the complainant, which is treated as deficiency in service. The cause of action of the instant case arose on dt. 10.08.2018 and on dt. 03.11.2018, when the Op refused to refund the amount. The Complainant preys this Forum seeking a direction to Op for refund of excess amount of Rs. 30,220/- and Rs. 60.780/- towards compensation for mental agony alongwith cost of litigation.
3. On receipt of the Notice Op-Regional Transport Officer, Kendrapara appeared through Ld. Public Prosecutor and field written statement into the dispute. The copy of the written statement duely served in the complainant. In the written statement, it is averred that, Complainant produced the vehicle for Temporary Registration before Registering Authority, Cuttack and registered the vehicle bearing TR Mark No. OR151TMP2018/642 dt. 18.01.2018.It is also averred that U/S 43(2) of M.V.Act,1988 the Temporary Registration is valid for only one month, which is not renewable. It is also averred that, under Rule9(2) of Orissa Motor Vehicle Taxation Rules 1976 provides that, in case if a Tax of the vehicle is not paid within 15days of the due date of payment the taxing officer shall impose penalty. The period and amount of penalty is described in details in the written statement. As the complainant produced the dispute vehicle for inspection and registration after seven months of expiry of temporary registration and as per the Rules the Op-Authority rightly imposed Rs. 54,220/- as registration charges of the vehicle. It is further stated that, as per software VAHAN 4 introduced by Govt. for registration of the vehicle and the M.V.Tax automatically collected as per the Rules. It is the version of the Op that, no excess amount has been collected from the complainant, accordingly the claim of the complainant for refund of money does not arise and no deficiency in service is committed by Op and the Op has replied the lawyer’s Notice vide office letter No. 5229/RTA dtd. 17.11.2018.
4. Heard the case on merit, as Ld. Counsels for the parties were not present at the time of hearing, though Ld. Counsel for Complainant files hazira, but absent on calls, perused the documents field into the dispute. Complainant to substantiate his case files attested Xerox copy of TAX INVOICE granted by SAISUDHA MOTORS, Cuttack. Op files documents as annexure 1 & 2. The admitted fact of the case is that, Rs. 54,220/- has been deposited before the Op-Registering authority by the complainant for registration of his TATA HCV goods carrier vehicle on dt. 10/08/2018. The complaint is filed for excess collection of Rs. 30,220/- as registering charges, which vehemently countered by the Op. On the defence, Op takes the plea that, as the Temporary Registration of the vehicle expires on dt. 18.02.18 and the vehicle is produced before the Op-authority on dt. 10.08.2018 after lapse of 6 months and in the mean time no Tax or related dues were paid to the Registering Authority. It is also the defence plea of the Op that U/S 43(2) of M.V.Act, 1988 and under Rule 9(2) of Orissa Motor Vehicle Taxation Rules-1976 and introduction of software VAHAN 4, the amount imposed for registration is in accordance with the rules and automatic generation of the software VAHAN 4.
The copy of the Registration Certificate (Annexure-1) files by the Op reveals that, the vehicle of the complainant was temporally registered with Registering Authority, Cuttack on dt. 18.01.2018 and the said registration is valid up to dt. 17.02.2018. Admittedly the vehicle was produced before Op-Authorities on dt. 10.08.2018 for its registration. The complaint is completely silent regarding Temporary Registration of the vehicle and reasons delayed for production of the vehicle before Op-authorities on dt. 10.08.2018. We agree with the plea of the Op-Authorities regarding collection of amount for registration of the vehicle which is in accordance with law and as per the procedure and no deficiency in service is committed by the Op as alleged by the Complainant.
The Complaint is dismissed without any cost.
Pronounced in the open Court, this 17st day of April-2019.
I, agree.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
