Car dealer fined Rs 25,000 for failing to hand over NOC
Chandigarh, October 2
Want to purchase a secondhand car from city’s car bazaar at Madhya Marg in Sector 7? Make sure that you get the NOC from the seller and the registration document before making the full payment for the vehicle, lest car dealers take you for a ride.
This is exactly what happened with Tejinder Singh Boparai, a resident of Sarawan village, Yamunanagar, who, after being made to run for three years for the documents of the vehicle bought from a car dealer, had to ultimately seek relief from the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, Chandigarh.
The district forum, comprising its president Lakshman Sharma, and members Madhu Mutneja and Jaswinder Singh Sidhu, directed the opposite parties to refund Rs 2.68 lakh besides slapping a fine of Rs 25,000 along with Rs 7,000 as costs of litigation.
Tejinder had purchased a secondhand car owned by Sukhbir Singh, a resident of Morinda, through BEE EMM Carbazar for Rs 2.78 lakh.
He paid Rs 2.68 lakh at the time of the sale. The balance amount of Rs 10,000 was to be paid on receipt of the NOC of the vehicle.
The car agent had assured him of smooth documentation process, including NOC for the transfer of the vehicle to his name.
He further said when he revisited the office of the opposite party, he learned that the car originally belonged to Mohindera Engineering Works, Industrial Area, Phase-II, Ram Darbar, and Sukhbir Singh, who had purchased the vehicle from them, had not yet got the vehicle transferred to his name.
The respondent further told him that the car could be transferred to his name once it was transferred to Sukhbir Singh’s name.
He said an affidavit signed by the seller, holding him responsible for any challan, case, accident, theft and all other liabilities against this vehicle, had also become null and void.
The proprietor of the BEE EMM Carbazar, Jagdish Chand, said he had brought the NOC and was willing to hand over the same to the complainant on the payment of Rs 10,000, which was outstanding against the complainant.
He said as the complainant had not paid any consideration reply to him, the complainant was not a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act.
He further took the preliminary objection that the car was purchased by the complainant in 2007 while the case was filed on January 25, 2010, thus the complaint was time-barred.
Chandigarh, October 2
Want to purchase a secondhand car from city’s car bazaar at Madhya Marg in Sector 7? Make sure that you get the NOC from the seller and the registration document before making the full payment for the vehicle, lest car dealers take you for a ride.
This is exactly what happened with Tejinder Singh Boparai, a resident of Sarawan village, Yamunanagar, who, after being made to run for three years for the documents of the vehicle bought from a car dealer, had to ultimately seek relief from the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, Chandigarh.
The district forum, comprising its president Lakshman Sharma, and members Madhu Mutneja and Jaswinder Singh Sidhu, directed the opposite parties to refund Rs 2.68 lakh besides slapping a fine of Rs 25,000 along with Rs 7,000 as costs of litigation.
Tejinder had purchased a secondhand car owned by Sukhbir Singh, a resident of Morinda, through BEE EMM Carbazar for Rs 2.78 lakh.
He paid Rs 2.68 lakh at the time of the sale. The balance amount of Rs 10,000 was to be paid on receipt of the NOC of the vehicle.
The car agent had assured him of smooth documentation process, including NOC for the transfer of the vehicle to his name.
He further said when he revisited the office of the opposite party, he learned that the car originally belonged to Mohindera Engineering Works, Industrial Area, Phase-II, Ram Darbar, and Sukhbir Singh, who had purchased the vehicle from them, had not yet got the vehicle transferred to his name.
The respondent further told him that the car could be transferred to his name once it was transferred to Sukhbir Singh’s name.
He said an affidavit signed by the seller, holding him responsible for any challan, case, accident, theft and all other liabilities against this vehicle, had also become null and void.
The proprietor of the BEE EMM Carbazar, Jagdish Chand, said he had brought the NOC and was willing to hand over the same to the complainant on the payment of Rs 10,000, which was outstanding against the complainant.
He said as the complainant had not paid any consideration reply to him, the complainant was not a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act.
He further took the preliminary objection that the car was purchased by the complainant in 2007 while the case was filed on January 25, 2010, thus the complaint was time-barred.
No comments:
Post a Comment