DATE OF FILING                    :     14.05.2014.

DATE OF S/R                            :      17.06.2014.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     07.01.2015.

Sunil Kumar Thakur,

son of Sri Lakshman Thakur,

residing at Panchsheel Apartment, Block ‘C’, Flat no. 303,

493/B/1, G.T. Road (S), Shibpur,

District  Howrah,

PIN 711102………….……………………………………………….. COMPLAINANT.

• Versus -

   

  1.         Vibrant Motors ( P ) Ltd.,

              situated at 225C, A.J.C. Bose  Road,

              Kolkata 700020.

   

  2.         Branch Manager,

              United Bank of India,

              Sandhyabazar Branch,

              situated at 514 & 515A, G.T. Road ( S ),

              District Howrah,

              PIN  711 101………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES.

   

                                                  P   R    E     S    E    N     T

   

  President     :     Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.

  Member       :     Smt. Jhumki Saha.

   

                                                   F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

  1. Complainant, Sunil Kumar Thakur,by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C .P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.p. to issue life time road tax and registration certificate, to receive cheque in question which is lying under the custody of the complainant, to pay Rs. 1,50,000/- as compensation and litigation costs of Rs. 10,000/- alongwith other relief or reliefs as theForum may deem fit and proper.
• 2. Brief fact of the case is that complainant bought one vehicle from o.p. no. 1 on payment of Rs. 10,79,440/-. On 16.01.2014 the vehicle was delivered to him vide annexures. The price of Rs. 10,79,440/- also includes the payment of Rs. 1,03,440/- towards life time road tax and service charges as per the price-list provided by o.p. no. 1 vide Annexure P1. But it is alleged by the complainant that even in spite of receiving the charges for life time road tax of Rs. 1,03,440/-, o.p. no. 1 intentionally paid road tax for five years for the said car. It is further stated by the complainant that o.p. no. 1 sent one cheque of Rs. 44,955/- dated 14.3.2014 towards the return of the rest amountpaid by him towards life time road tax. But he requested the o.p. no. 1 to take the cheque back and issue life time road tax and registration certificate. But o.p. no. 1 did not do the needful. Hence, the case.

3. Notices were served. Theyappeared and filed written version. Accordingly, case was heard on contest.

4.        Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  ?

2. Whether the complainant isentitled to get any relief as prayed for ?

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

5.  Both the points are  taken up together for consideration. Admittedly, complainant got a discount of Rs. 35,000/- at the time of purchase of the vehicle in question, In the written version, o.p. no. 1 has stated that they wanted to pay the life time tax but Motor Vehicle Department refused to accept the same. O.p. no. 1 could pay the road tax only for five years and immediately they returned the amount of Rs. 44,955/- to the complainant. It is entirely the discretion of the Motor Vehicle Department to receive the life time road tax for a vehicle. If o.p. no. 1 had any malafide intention, they would not have returned the amount of Rs. 44,955/- immediately to the complainant. Here we take a pause. When o.p. no. 1 is not at all sure about the receipt of life time road tax for the four wheelers by the Motor Vehicles Department, why their price list should display the amount of life time road tax only to attract people to buy a car ? This is nothing but unfair trade practice for which we have nothing but to hold them liable and responsible for their misdeeds which caused mental pain and  agony as well harassment to the complainant. Complainant has not prayed for any relief against o.p. no. 2.  Points under consideration are accordingly decided.

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 278  of 2014 ( HDF 278  of 2014 )  be  allowed on contest with  costs  against  the O.P. no. 1 and dismissed without costs against o.p. no. 2.    

      That the  O.P. no. 1 is directed to pay Rs. 44,955/-, being  the amount of the cheque, Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- as litigation costs to the complainant within one month from the date of this order i.d., the entire amount of Rs. 56,955/- shall carry an interest at the rate of 9  per cent  per annum till full realization.

      The complainant is also directed to handover  to the o.p. no. 1 the cheque being no. 090470 dated 14.3.2014 drawn on HDFC Bank by o.p. no. 1  after receiving the aforesaid decreetal amount.         

      The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.            

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.            

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

      (  Jhumki Saha  )                                                                  

  Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah.