Punjab

Rupnagar

CC/22/47

Khushal Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

The sub divisional magistratee - Opp.Party(s)

05 May 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

RUPNAGAR

Consumer Complaint No.        :47of 24.03.2023

             Date of Decision                     :05.05.2023

Khushal Singh aged about years son of Sh.Ram Lal Resident of Village Nanowal Post Office Ganguwal, Tehsil Shri Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar.

                                                                                      ….Complainant

Versus

 

1. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar.
2. State Transport Commissioner, Punjab, Chandigarh.

  …Opposite Parties

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act.

 

QUORUM:

SH.KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

SH.RAMESH KUMAR GUPTA, MEMBER

SMT. RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant             :         Sh.ManishMehra, Advocate

For OP No.1                            :         Sh.Rajan Sharma, Clerk

For OP No.2                            :         Ms.Manpreet Kaur, Auth. Rep.

 

ORDER

PER  KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

 

1. In the present complaint, counsel for the complainant has averred thatcomplainant had applied for fancy number PB16-4545 online in the office of OP-1 and had deposited amount of Rs.5000/- through Transaction ID PBY2101084667088 (IK0AXGZUR3) through net-banking of State Bank of India, Branch Anandpur Sahib from account No.20209359259 and this amount of Rs.5000/- was deducted from the account of complainant but on the portal of department, the transaction was shown as failed and then the complainant through his friend’s debit card again made the payment of Rs.5000/- and this amount was shown as successful.  In this way, complainant has made payment of Rs.10,000/- to OPs instead of Rs.5000/- for same fancy number i.e. PB16-4545.  As per rules, the complainant has to make payment of Rs.5000/- only.  When complainant has approached his concerned bank then they disclosed through the reply of RTI application of complainant in which bank has stated that transaction initiated with reference No.IK0AXG7UR3 and was process successfully at our end.  After that, complainant has approached to OP No.1 many times but OP-1 has not paid any heed to requests of complainant, then complainant also send RTI application to OP-2 and OP-2 has marked the RTI application of complainant to OP-1 on 30.08.2021 but the OP-1 has not replied to RTI application and also not resolved the complaint of complainant so far.  Complainant also served legal notice but no reply has been received.  Lastly, prayer has been made that Ops be directed to pay Rs.5000/- of deposited amount and to pay Rs.50,000/- for harassment and Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses. 
2. Upon notice, OP-1have appeared and contested the complaint by submitted that complaint is not maintainable; the complainant himself registered with his ID on Vahan Portal site/app, for the purpose of booking fancy No.PB16F-4545 and he has claimed that at the time of registration he has paid the amount of Rs.5000/- twice through the Vahan Portal Site to State Transport Authorities.The OP-1 i.e. SDM has no any concern with the registration, which was paid by complainant;  the OP-1 has no concern regarding the present matter as well as fee, deposited in account of State Transport Authority and OP has no authority/power to refund the alleged amount; no cause of action; there is no deficiency/default on the part of OP.  On merits, complainant having knowledge at the time of paying the said amount that he to pay to amount of Rs.5000/- only, but has knowingly deposited of Rs.5000/- in twice.  Other averments of complaint are denied and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. OP No.2 also filed separate reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that complaint is not maintainable; complainant filed false and vexatious complaint; complainant himself registered with his ID on Vahan Portal site/application for the purpose of booking fancy registered No.PB16-F-4545 for his vehicle and he was claimed that at the time of registration and he has paid the amount of Rs.5000/- through the Vahan Portal site to state Transport Authority.  In this matter the OP-1 has got no direct involvement with the registration which was paid by complainant.  From the perusal of all concerned record of banks and State Transport Authority respondent the complainant Khushal Singh through his account No.20209359259 paid a sum of Rs.5,000/- on dated 08.01.2021 to RTA Punjab.  From the perusal of account statement of No.34297268207 which is in the name of Jaspreet Singh, State Bank of India Branch Nangal township, Jaspreet Singh on 08.01.2021 never been paid any money to the account of RTA Punjab.  From said account found that the complainant paid Rs.5000/- to INB Punjab RTA on 08.01.2021.  Hence complainant never been paid and excess amount to OP i.e. Government of Punjab Authority of Transport.  OP further inquired the matter through Nation Information Center, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology Govt. of India that the alleged payment is failed as per the payment ID bank Log.  On merits, other averments of complaint are denied and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs. 
4. In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties produced on the file their respective documents.
5. We have heard learned the parties with their valuable assistance and have also gone through the record carefully.
6. On perusal of documents, it is an admitted fact that complainant has applied for the fancy number by paying the amount of Rs.5000/- through online transaction his bank account of State Bank of India.  Complainant stated that at the time of getting fancy number, the payment was shown as failure and then complainant paid Rs.5000/- from the account of Jaspreet Singh account No.34297268207 again. On perusal of written statement, OP stated that the amount of Rs.5000/- was only received by RTO through online transaction of Kaushal account and OP has not received any payment from the Jaspreet’s account.  On perusal of the annexure dated  of OP which is a document containing the amount transferred from SBI to the Op’s account.  It is observed that an amount of Rs.5000/- has only been transferred by the complainant into the OP’s account.  Complainant has failed to adduce any documentary evidence that he has transferred Rs.10,000/- to the OPs account.  Moreover, on perusal of the case file , it is observed that the transaction of payment to the RTO has been done through the SBI account of complainant and his friends debit card.  We are of the considered view that the SBI is a necessary for the adjudication of the case but the complainant has failed to implead SBI who is necessary party for the proper adjudication of the case.  
7. In view of the above, the complainant has failed to prove the case hence, complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs.
8. On perusal of OP’s documents, it is observed that OP’s have failed to redress the complaint of complainant. Even after giving legal notice,OPs also OP’s failed to redress his complaint.  Moreover, it is observed that OP’s failed to produce their statement of account showing that they have not receivedsaid excess amount of Rs.5000/- against complainant’s fancy numbers.  Hence, an adverse inference drawn against OPs.
9. In our considered view the complainant has deposited Rs.10,000/- in place of Rs.5000/-.  Hence, the complaint is partly allowed and the Ops are directed to refund Rs.5,000/- alongwith interest @6% per annum from the date of deposit till the date of payment.  Further, Ops are directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as compensation including litigation expenses.
10. The compliance of order be made by the OPs within the period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
11. Copies of the order be sent to the parties, as permissible, under the rules.
12. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

Dated:05.05.2023

                                         (Kuljit Singh)

                                           President

 

              (Ramesh Kumar Gupta)                                                  (Ranvir Kaur)

                      Member                                                                          Member