Date of filing :     23.03.2023

                                                                                                                                         Date of disposal: 31.08.2023                                                                                               

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

THIRUVALLUR

 BEFORE  TMT. Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, M.A.,M.L, Ph.D (Law)                                        .…. PRESIDENT

                 THIRU.P.MURUGAN,  M.COM.,ICWA (Inter),B.L.,                                                       ......MEMBER-II

CC. No.26/2023

THIS THURSDAY, THE 31^st DAY OF AUGUST 2023

Mr.C.Sampath,

The Proprietor,

Vijaya Industries,

No.211, SIDCO Industrial Estate,

Ambattur,

Chennai 98.                                                                                               ……Complainant.

                                                                               //Vs//

The Manager,

Zulaikha Motors private Limited,

No.398 & 398A

Velachery Tambaram Main Road,

Velachery, Chennai 600 042.                                                          …..Opposite party.

Counsel for the complainant                                    :   M/s.R.Karunakaran, Advocate.

Counsel for the opposite party.                               :   M/s.Rithvik Anand, Advocate.

This complaint is coming before us on various dates and finally on 25.08.2023 in the presence of M/s.R.Karunakaran, counsel for the complainant and M/s.Rithvik Anand, counsel for the opposite party and upon perusing the documents and evidences of both sides this Commission delivered the following:

ORDER

PRONOUNCED BY TMT. Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, PRESIDENT

            1. This complaint has been filed by the complainant U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite party for non-supply of Original document relating to the vehicle purchased by the complainant from the opposite party along with a prayer to direct the opposite party to produce the new vehicle having the same model and description or to return a sum of Rs.18,83,122/-, the cost of the vehicle with interest and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony, monetary loss and hardship caused to the complainant due to the act of the opposite party and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards cost of the complaint.

Summary of facts culminating into complaint:-

2. It was the case of the complainant that he approached the opposite party to purchase four wheeler vehicle namely THAR LX P AT 4WD 4S HT GRY for which the complainant and opposite party entered into an agreement for a total consideration of Rs.18,83,122/- and the opposite party issued tax invoice and the opposite party arranged Mahindra and Mahindra Finance and the  availed loan for Rs.15,83,122/-from the said Mahindra and Mahindra Finance service limited. Thus the complainant paid the entire sale consideration for the vehicle Rs.18,83,122/- to the opposite party on 22.11.2022 and therefore there is no due by the complainant. But the opposite party had withheld the original RC Book and not handed over to the complainant. The opposite party was saying vague and untenable reasons and refused to return the original RC Book.  It amounts to unfair trade practice. The opposite party instructed the complainant to produce the vehicle and the opposite party after receiving the same fraudulently with mala fide intention created duplicate RC Book and handed over the same to the complainant.  As soon as the complainant had received the duplicate RC Book he questioned with the opposite party what had happened to the original RC Book and why the opposite party has not returned the original RC Book for which the opposite party negligently and recklessly replied to the complainant.  The act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice against the complainant. Thus aggrieved by the act of the opposite party the present complaint was filed to direct the opposite party to produce the new vehicle having the same model and description or to return a sum of Rs.18,83,122/- cost of the sale consideration of the vehicle with interest and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony, monetary loss and hardship caused to the complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards cost of the complaint.

The crux of the defence put forth by the opposite party:-

4. The opposite party filed version disputing complaint allegations contending interalia that in view of the specific prohibition under the Consumer Protection Act, that the goods purchased or services engaged or availed was for commercial purpose the complaint was outside the purview of Consumer Protection Act. Complainant had purchased the THAR LX P AT HT GREY vehicle having registration No.TN 13 X 5009 booked on 03.11.2021 and paid the booking amount of Rs.21,000/- on 03.11.2021.  The vehicle OEM INV date 12.01.2022 and retail date 25.01.2022. The registration of the vehicle was completed and the complainant took delivery of the vehicle on 03.02.2022.  The opposite party states that the agent who was entrusted to interact with the RTO had inadvertently misplaced the RC book. The opposite party as per the protocol made every endeavor and got a Duplicate of the same. The relief sought for by the complainant to part with a new vehicle having the same model and description was wholly untenable. The complaint is not only misconceived, frivolous, vexatious in nature but also an abuse of process of law.  Thus they sought for the complaint to be dismissed.

5. On the side of complainant proof affidavit was filed and documents marked as Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 were submitted.  On the side of opposite party proof affidavit was filed but no document was filed on their side.

Points for consideration:

1. Whether the non-issuance of Original documents (RC Book) relating to the vehicle purchased by the complainant from the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and whether the same has been successfully proved by the complainant?
2. If so to what reliefs the complainant is entitled?

Point No.1 & 2:-

The following documents were filed on the side of complainants in support of their contentions;

1. Copy of Tax invoice issued by the opposite party to the complainant dated 03.02.2022 was marked as Ex.A1;
2. Copy of Statement of Account dated 22.11.2022 was marked as Ex.A2;
3. Copy of RC Book was marked as Ex.A3;
4.  Legal notice issued by the complainant to the opposite party dated 31.02.2023 was marked as Ex.A4;
5. Acknowledgement card for proof of delivery was marked as Ex.A5;

6. Complainant filed written arguments with an endorsement to treat the same as oral arguments and the opposite party made oral arguments.  The crux of the written arguments of the complainant is that he had purchased the four wheeler THAR LX P AT 4WD 4S HT GRY from the opposite party for a sale consideration of Rs.18,83,122/- and even after entire amount has been paid the opposite party did not provide the Original RC Book.  However, on repeated approach they were ready to provide only Duplicate RC Book for the reasons best known to them.  The reason stated by the opposite party was that, the Original RC Book was misplaced by their agent inadvertently which clearly proved that the opposite party had committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.  Further no reply was also given for the notice issued and only after filing the complaint before this Commission they have come with a defence that the Original RC Book could not be found which proved that the opposite party had committed deficiency in service.  The complainant purchased the vehicle for office use and family purpose.  As per the Consumer protection Act only if the goods purchase is use for commercial purpose it could be held as complaint not maintainable as the issue involved in the commercial. Thus sought for the complaint to be allowed.

7. On the other hand the learned counsel appearing for the opposite party admitted the purchase of the vehicle and also fairly submitted that the Original RC Book was inadvertently misplaced by the agent and hence the Original RC Book could not be found even after genuine efforts.  The opposite party accepted for providing the Duplicate RC Book with certain compensation.  Thus he sought for the complaint to be dismissed alleging no deficiency in service was committed by them.

8. We perused the entire pleadings and materials.  The factum of purchase of the vehicle and non issuance of Original RC Book relating to the vehicle THAR LX PAT 4WD 4S HT DRY purchased by the complainant was not disputed by both parties. It is clearly admitted by the opposite party that the Original RC Book was misplaced and could not be found even after exercising best efforts and that they were ready to issue a Duplicate RC Book. Thus, it is well established that the opposite party had committed deficiency in service in not issuing the Original RC Book to the complainant.  However, it is to be noted that the Duplicate RC Book was obtained by the opposite party only after taking due steps to be taken for obtaining Duplicate RC Book from the Authority as the Original RC Book could not be found.  The contention by the complainant that there would be reduction in the value of the vehicle due to the Duplicate RC Book could not be entertained.  More so, when the vehicle was kept in his custody seeking for the relief of a new vehicle or refund of the cost of the vehicle seems an exaggerated relief.  Further the value of the vehicle has nothing to do with the duplicate RC Book as it value of the vehicle entirely depends upon the condition of the vehicle.

9. In such circumstances though by a recent decision in NCDRC it was held that delivery of vehicle withholding its Original documents amounts to illegal delivery of the vehicle, in the present case when it is fairly admitted by the opposite party that the Original RC Book could not be found inspite of strenuous efforts this Commission has no other option but to do complete justice, orders the opposite party to deliver the Duplicate RC Book within two weeks and for the hardship caused to the complainant due to loss of Original RC Book to compensate the same by paying a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. We also direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant. Thus we answer these points accordingly.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed against the opposite party directing him

a) To issue duplicate Registration Book within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order; 

b) To pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) towards compensation for the mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order; 

c) To pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) towards litigation expenses to the complainant.

d) Amount in clause (b) if not paid by the opposite party in four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% from the date of complaint till realization.

 Dictated by the President to the steno-typist, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 31^st day of August 2023.

         -Sd-                                                           -Sd-                                                          -Sd-

 MEMBER-II                                            MEMBER-I                                          PRESIDENT

List of document filed by the complainant:-

List of documents filed by the opposite party :-

-Nil- 

        -Sd-                                                           -Sd-                                                   -Sd-

MEMBER-II                                                MEMBER-I                                       PRESIDENT