Mercedes dealer told to pay Rs 33L relief

Avneet Kaur

Jalandhar, March 24

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, has directed an authorised Mercedes dealer, Joshi Auto Zone Private Limited, Paragpur, Jalandhar, to pay Rs 33,35,530 to a city-based resident for the loss suffered by him due to its negligence in registering the vehicle on time, along with Rs 22,000 as litigation cost for deficiency in service.

Bubble Export, through its partner Taranbir Singh, a resident of Focal Point, here, filed a complaint against Joshi Auto Zone Private Limited, stating that he purchased a Mercedes Benz car from the dealer for a total amount of Rs 38, 38,840.

He said at the time of the purchase, he paid to the opposite party an amount of Rs 2,95,000 in advance, via cheque as registration fee for getting the same registered with the DTO, Jalandhar.

He said the cheque was drawn well on time by the dealer and he assured him that the vehicle would get registered within a month. However, he was then (at the time of purchase) was issued a temporary registration number which was valid up to one month, i.e. September 27, 2015.

The complainant further alleged that it was the responsibility of the opposite party to submit the entire documents before the DTO, Jalandhar, for issuance of the regular registration number within 30 days, i.e. during the validity period of the temporary registration number. However, it miserably failed to do so. Besides, he also purchased a motor vehicle insurance cover from the opposite party for the insured declare value (IDV) of Rs 36,46,898 for the period from August 28, 2015, to August 27, 2016, and had paid Rs 1,10,595 as premium.

Talking to the Tribune, Sarabjit Singh, father of Taranbir, said on October 7, 2015, when Taranbir was returning from Ludhiana to Jalandhar in the car which was being driven by Guddu Saini, driver, it met with an accident opposite a Pepsi factory on GT Road, Phillaur. When a stray animal came in front of the car and to avoid any collision, the driver applied the brakes. As a result, the car overturned and collided with a sewer drain constructed alongside the road.

He said due to the accident, the car was extensively damaged. Intimation regarding the same was given to the insurance company and he filed the ‘own damage’ claim.

Sarabjit said his claim was rejected on the grounds that the vehicle was not having a valid registration number on the date of the accident and he suffered loss equivalent to the cost of the car, despite the fact that the registration fee and road tax were deposited by him to the dealer on August 8, 2015.

However, the opposite party in its reply to the commission said: “The complainant wanted to have registration number of its choice. Hence, the process of registration was late. Also, after the expiry of the temporary registration number, the complainant was not supposed to take the vehicle on road in view of the Section 39 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Meanwhile, the State Consumer Redressal  Commission in its judgment said: “The payment of Rs 2, 95,000 was received by the opposite party for permanent registration of the vehicle. However, it failed to register the vehicle on time. Therefore, the opposite party is deficient in service, which resulted into the loss. If the permanent registration would have been applied during the subsistence of the temporary registration number, then the insurance claim could not have been repudiated.”

Thus, the commission directed the dealer to pay Rs 33,35,530 to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum with effect from the date of accident, October 7, 2015, till realisation.

What the order says

The State Consumer Redressal Commission in its judgment said: “The payment of Rs 2, 95,000 was received by the opposite party for permanent registration of the vehicle. However, it failed to register the vehicle on time. Therefore, the opposite party is deficient in service, which resulted into the loss. If the permanent registration would have been applied during the subsistence of the temporary registration number, then the insurance claim could not have been repudiated.” Thus, it directed the dealer to pay Rs 33,35,530 to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum with effect from the date of accident, October 7, 2015, till realisation.