DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BARNALA, PUNJAB.

 

Complaint Case No : CC/83/2019

Date of Institution : 08.07.2019

Date of Decision : 18.11.2019

Nand Kishore s/o Sh. Ashok Kumar resident of H. No. B-II-573, Pharwahi Bazaar, Ward No. 6, Barnala, District Barnala. …Complainant

Versus

1. Gurvinder Singh alias Gagan (Shahpuria) s/o Swaran Singh resident of Dashmesh Nagar, Gill Road, Ludhiana, Mobile No. 98883-59632.

2. Ajay Kumar s/o Raj Kumar H. No. 215, Ward No. 5, Master Colony, Maur Mandi, District Bathinda. 

3. M/s OLX, 3-A, Garden Estate, DLF Phase-III, Sector 24, Gurugram-122010, Haryana through its Managing Director/Manager.

…Opposite Parties

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present: Sh. RK Singla counsel for complainant.

Sh. Gurvinder Singh opposite party No. 1 in person.

Opposite parties No. 2 and 3 exparte.

Quorum.-

1. Sh. Kuljit Singh : President

2. Sh. Tejinder Singh Bhangu : Member

3. Smt. Manisha : Member

(ORDER BY KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT):

    The complainant namely Nand Kishore has filed the present complaint under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 as amended up to date (in short the Act) against Gurvinder Singh and others. (hereinafter referred as  opposite parties). 

2. The facts leading to the present complaint as stated by the complainant are that the opposite party No. 1 is working as an Agent of opposite party No. 3 and buy and sell cars on behalf of opposite party NO. 3 on commission through site of opposite party No. 3. The opposite party No. 1 sold the car of the opposite party No. 2 to the complainant through the site of opposite party No. 3. 

3. It is further alleged that the complainant approached the opposite party No. 1 to purchase a car who assured the complainant the condition of car No. PB-03V-0719 is very good and there is no hypothecation on the said car. So, trusting the words of opposite party No. 1 he agreed to purchase the said car for Rs. 1,92,000/-. On 8.5.2019 the opposite party No. 1 alongwith opposite party No. 2 came to Barnala with the said car and told the complainant to take the delivery of the car. They assured the complainant that they will give RC, insurance and other documents within 2 days. So, complainant made the payment of Rs. 1,50,000/- to them vide transfer through bank and also gave Rs. 42,000/- in cash but they gave no receipt of Rs. 42,000/-. 

4. It is further alleged that on 9.5.2017 the opposite parties NO. 1 and 2 visited the house of the complainant and handed over the registration certificate of the car and on checking the RC and insurance the complainant shocked as there was HPA on the RC in favour of Oriental Bank of Commerce and insurance was made on 8.5.2019 in favour of opposite party No. 2. However, they assured the complainant that the said documents will be got rectified by them by canceling the HPA and getting the insurance being transferred to the name of the complainant. Further, when complainant took the car on road the steering of the car is heavy and AC was not in working condition. The complainant got checked the same from a mechanic who told that there is defect in the engine of the car and to put the car in right condition it will cost Rs. 70,000/-. The complainant approached the opposite parties No. 1 and 2 and told the condition of the car but they avoided the complainant and neither they got the defects rectified nor supplied the required documents which is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, the present complaint is filed seeking the following reliefs.-

1) The opposite parties may be directed to refund the amount of Rs. 1,92,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of payment 6.5.2019 till realization.   

2) To pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment. 

3) To pay Rs. 11,000/- as litigation expenses. 

The complainant also filed rejoinder in which he has reiterated the submissions as mentioned in the complaint. 

5. Upon notice of complaint, opposite party No. 1 filed written reply taking preliminary objections that present complaint relates to sale and purchase of used car i.e. Maruty Ritz bearing No. PB-03-V-0719. The opposite party No. 1 wanted to sell his used car and uploaded its particulars on the application of opposite party No. 3 i.e OLX which is meant for selling and purchasing of vehicles etc. The complainant visited the opposite party No. 1 and checked the car through his mechanic and car remained with him for two days for trial and thereafter he agreed to purchase the car. The complainant made the payment of car except Rs. 42,000/- and it was agreed between the parties that the complainant will make the payment of said amount when the original documents will be handed over to him but the complainant did not make the payment of balance amount and not turned up to collect the original papers. The opposite party No. 1 many times approached the complainant for balance payment and collection of original papers but he lingered on the matter. The original papers are with the opposite party No. 1 as the vehicle was owned by father of opposite party No. 1. The car when handed over to the complainant was in proper and good running condition and if there is any defect the same might have taken birth after handing over the same to the complainant due to his poor driving. Further, he has not come to the Forum with clean hands. 

6. On merits, the opposite party No. 1 is not the agent of the opposite party No. 2 or opposite party No. 3. The car was owned by the father of the opposite party No. 1. The fact of payment of Rs. 1,50,000/- is not denied but amount of Rs. 42,000/- was not paid by the complainant. Further, the entry of HPA was made on RC as earlier the vehicle was hypothecated but the entire loan amount has been cleared prior to sale of the vehicle to the complainant but the entry of HPA has not been got canceled. NOC of bank was also handed over to the complainant. Rest of the averments of the complaint are denied by the opposite party No. 1 and prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint with costs. 

7. The opposite parties No. 2 and 3 not appeared before this Forum despite service so the opposite parties No. 2 and 3 were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 26.8.2019. 

8. In support of his complaint, the complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of bank transaction Ex.C-2, copy of RC Ex.C-3, copy of insurance Ex.C-4, copy of chatting Ex.C-5, copy of car description Ex.C-6, copy of receipt Ex.C-7, copy of affidavit of Ajay Kumar Ex.C-8, copy of Aadhaar card of Ajay Kumar Ex.C-9 and closed the evidence. 

9. To rebut the case of the complainant, the opposite party No. 1 tendered in evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP-1/1, copy of affidavit of Jain Parkash Khushwaha Ex.OP-1/2, copy of affidavit attestation Ex.OP-1/3, copy of affidavit of Jai Parkash Khushwaha Ex.OP-1/4, copy of affidavit of Nand Kishore Ex.OP-1/5, copy of Aadhaar card of Nand Kishore Ex.OP-1/6, copy of affidavit of Aman Sagar Ex.OP-1/7, copy of Aadhaar card of Aman Sagar Ex.OP-1/8, copy of form No. 28 Ex.OP-1/9, copy of form NO. 29 Ex.OP-1/10, copy of form No. 30 Ex.OP-1/11, copy of affidavit of Ajay Kumar Ex.OP-1/12, copy of Aadhaar card of Ajay Kumar Singla Ex.OP-1/13, copy of RC Ex.OP-1/14, copy of policy Ex.OP-1/15, copy of hire purchase agreement Ex.OP-1/16, copy of NOC Ex.OP-17 and closed the evidence.

10. We have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. Written arguments also filed by the opposite party No. 1. 

11. Before going into the merits of the present complaint firstly there is main question before us whether the complainant is consumer of the opposite parties or not ?

12. It is admitted by the opposite party No. 1 that the complainant purchased the car but he specifically stated in his written version and affidavit that the said car was the ownership of his father Swaran Singh which has been proved from the affidavit of Jai Parkash Khushwaha Ex.OP-1/4 in which the deponent specifically deposed that he sold the car to Swaran Singh son of Joginder Singh resident of Ludhiana who is the father of the opposite party No. 1. But the complainant has not arrayed the said Swaran Singh as opposite party in the present complaint. Further, as the said car which was purchased by the complainant is now the ownership of father of opposite party No. 1 so the complainant is not the consumer of the opposite party No. 1. The complainant has not filed any document vide which he can prove that at any stage the opposite party No. 1 was the owner of the car in question.  

13. Further the complainant also failed to prove on the file that he made any payment to the opposite party No. 2 as in his complaint he alleged that he made payment of Rs. 1,50,000/- through bank transfer on 8.5.2019 and Rs. 42,000/- in cash but he failed to file any document that these payments have been given by the complainant to the opposite party No. 2. To prove the payment of Rs. 1,50,000/- the complainant has relied upon copy of bank statement Ex.C-2 in which payment of Rs. 1,50,000/- was given to opposite party No. 1. But this bank statement is of the account of some Keshav Singla who made the payment to Gurvinder Singh  opposite party No. 1 and not by the complainant. Secondly, Gurvinder Singh opposite party No. 1 has no link with the car in question as he is neither the owner of the car nor any Agent of the opposite parties No. 2 and 3. From all these documents it is proved on the file that the complainant is not consumer of the opposite parties as he failed to prove on the file that he made any payment to the opposite parties for the purchase of car in question. 

14. As a result of the above discussion the present complaint is dismissed as the same is not maintainable before this Forum as the complainant has failed to prove on the file that he is consumer of the opposite parties. No order as to costs or compensation. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach the appropriate Authority/Court to redress his grievances, if he desires so. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance.

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN FORUM:

  18th Day of November 2019

 

 

            (Kuljit Singh)

            President

 

            (Tejinder Singh Bhangu)

Member

 

(Manisha)

Member