Chandigarh: Dealer fined ₹25k for not steering exchanged car's transfer
For failing to transfer the ownership of a city resident's old car, exchanged for a new one, which led to a speeding challan landing at his address, a car dealership will be coughing up ₹25,000 as compensation.
Terming them guilty of deficiency in service, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-DF 1 has directed the dealership, Lally Motors, to pay the complainant ₹15,000 for mental agony and ₹10,000 as costs of litigation.
Further, the dealership has also been told to clear the pending challan and transfer the exchanged car's ownership to either themselves or the new owner to whom they have sold the vehicle.
In 2019, the complainant, Dr Swaran Singh, a resident of Sector 18, had walked into Lally Motors in Industrial Area to purchase a Volkswagen Vento car.
Under a scheme, he agreed to exchange his old vehicle, valued around ₹2 lakh, which was adjusted against the price of the new vehicle.
After the deal, the dealership had issued a delivery letter-cum-undertaking, dated October 23, 2019, promising that they will be responsible for all future taxes, challans and accidents related to the old car.
But three years later, Dr Singh received a challan from the Chandigarh Traffic Police in December 2022, much to his surprise.
The photograph attached to the challan showed his old car, which had supposedly been sold to someone else by the dealership. On inspecting further, to his shock, Dr Singh learned that the dealership had failed to transfer the car's ownership to its new owner after the exchange.
Approaching the consumer commission, the complainant alleged that the car dealership sold his old car further without transferring its ownership, a violation of the Motor Vehicles Act.
The dealership was summoned by the commission but they didn't turn up and were proceeded against ex parte on October 21 2024.
Skoda Auto Volkswagen India contested the complaint, taking preliminary objections of maintainability, cause of action, jurisdiction and non-joinder of the necessary party. They alleged that so far as selling of the car went, they had nothing to do with it, and it was a matter between the dealership and the complainant.
The commission accepted that the company had no role in the dispute and dismissed the complaint against them.
However, it observed that the complainant had submitted documentary proof against the dealership, which was not rebutted in any way. Disposing of the complaint, the commission slapped a ₹25,000 penalty on the dealership, including the compensation and litigation costs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
14 hours ago
- Time of India
Insurance firm directed to pay 11L for unfair trade practice in settling claim
Raipur: The Chhattisgarh state consumer disputes redressal commission directed an insurance firm backed by a public-sector bank to pay Rs 11,16,801 to a Raipur-based firm for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice in settling a vehicle insurance claim. The commission also awarded Rs 50,000 for mental agony and Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs. The order, passed by President Justice Gautam Chourdiya and Member Pramod Kumar Varma, set aside an earlier ruling by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raipur, which dismissed the complaint as premature. The commission noted that keeping the claim pending for an extended period, especially after the damaged vehicle was handed over as per the insurer's instructions, amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. "After accepting the surveyor's assessment, instructing disposal of the damaged vehicle, and its actual disposal, it was improper for the insurer to raise further objections. Keeping the claim pending despite receiving the wreck value amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The insurer is liable to pay the remaining Rs 11,16,801, along with compensation for mental agony and litigation costs. The district commission erred in holding the claim premature, making its order unsustainable and liable to be set aside," remarked the consumer commission on the case. The firm's car, insured with the insurance firm, met with an accident on Nov 8, 2019. The insurance company assessed the loss at Rs 11,16,801 and instructed the complainant to hand over the damaged vehicle to a salvage buyer, who paid Rs 13,30,000. The firm alleged that despite these actions and assurances of payment, the remaining amount of Rs 11,16,801 was not disbursed. A complaint was filed before the district commission seeking the balance amount and compensation. The insurance firm, in its defence, said that the claim was pending as the complainant did not provide clarifications and relevant documents regarding the incident. The state commission, however, observed that the insurer already acted upon the surveyor's settlement recommendation and instructed the disposal of the vehicle's wreckage. The commission noted that after proceeding towards settlement and the disposal of the wreckage, it was improper for the insurer to raise further objections. The insurance company has been directed to pay the remaining assessed loss of Rs 11,16,801 with 6% annual simple interest from the date of filing the complaint until realisation, along with the compensation and litigation costs.
Hindustan Times
a day ago
- Hindustan Times
Chandigarh: Dealer fined ₹25k for not steering exchanged car's transfer
For failing to transfer the ownership of a city resident's old car, exchanged for a new one, which led to a speeding challan landing at his address, a car dealership will be coughing up ₹25,000 as compensation. Terming them guilty of deficiency in service, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-DF 1 has directed the dealership, Lally Motors, to pay the complainant ₹15,000 for mental agony and ₹10,000 as costs of litigation. Further, the dealership has also been told to clear the pending challan and transfer the exchanged car's ownership to either themselves or the new owner to whom they have sold the vehicle. In 2019, the complainant, Dr Swaran Singh, a resident of Sector 18, had walked into Lally Motors in Industrial Area to purchase a Volkswagen Vento car. Under a scheme, he agreed to exchange his old vehicle, valued around ₹2 lakh, which was adjusted against the price of the new vehicle. After the deal, the dealership had issued a delivery letter-cum-undertaking, dated October 23, 2019, promising that they will be responsible for all future taxes, challans and accidents related to the old car. But three years later, Dr Singh received a challan from the Chandigarh Traffic Police in December 2022, much to his surprise. The photograph attached to the challan showed his old car, which had supposedly been sold to someone else by the dealership. On inspecting further, to his shock, Dr Singh learned that the dealership had failed to transfer the car's ownership to its new owner after the exchange. Approaching the consumer commission, the complainant alleged that the car dealership sold his old car further without transferring its ownership, a violation of the Motor Vehicles Act. The dealership was summoned by the commission but they didn't turn up and were proceeded against ex parte on October 21 2024. Skoda Auto Volkswagen India contested the complaint, taking preliminary objections of maintainability, cause of action, jurisdiction and non-joinder of the necessary party. They alleged that so far as selling of the car went, they had nothing to do with it, and it was a matter between the dealership and the complainant. The commission accepted that the company had no role in the dispute and dismissed the complaint against them. However, it observed that the complainant had submitted documentary proof against the dealership, which was not rebutted in any way. Disposing of the complaint, the commission slapped a ₹25,000 penalty on the dealership, including the compensation and litigation costs.
Hindustan Times
a day ago
- Hindustan Times
Chandigarh: Driver makes off with impounded truck from Traffic Lines, booked
A truck driver was booked for allegedly stealing his impounded vehicle from the Sector 29 Traffic Lines on Thursday night. The vehicle, bearing registration number RJ01-GD-0370, was later traced to the Verka Milk Plant in Mohali. According to an official report submitted by assistant sub-inspector (ASI) Satyavir Singh, in-charge of the Impound Section, the truck was seized near the Hallo Majra light point on Thursday by ASI Subhash Chander under various sections of the Motor Vehicles Act, including Sections 115, 194(1), 3/181, 29/192, 146, 196 and 177. The vehicle was then deposited at the Sector 29 Traffic Lines around 7.20 pm and its key was handed over to the impound section. However, the following day, at 11 am, the vehicle was missing from the parking area. ASI Satyavir suspected that the driver, Mahaveer Prasad Jat, used a duplicate key to take away the truck without settling the challan. After informing senior officers, a search operation was launched by the Impound Section. Contact was established with the vehicle owner and driver using the numbers provided on the truck. It was then learned that the vehicle was being unloaded at the Verka Milk Plant in Mohali. Acting swiftly, ASI Satyavir, along with other traffic officials, rushed to the location and successfully tracked down both the vehicle and driver. The driver, Mahaveer Prasad Jat, a resident of Ajmer, Rajasthan, was taken into custody and brought back to the Sector 29 Traffic Lines along with the truck and the second key. Based on a formal complaint and preliminary inquiry, a case was registered against the accused under Sections 303 (2) (theft) and 317 (2) (stolen property) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
