Home
Consumer Case Studies
 
Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
 
JD Kapoor, President; Mahesh Chandra & Rumnita Mittal, Members
 
Neelam Chaturvedi - Appellant
Versus
MGF (India) Ltd - Respondent
 
Appeal No. 163 of 1996 Decided on 13.12.2004
 
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 2(1)(g) - Deficiency in service - Agreement for purchase of motor vehicle - Initial payment of Rs. 23,400/- made and balance in equal installments - Entire amount paid by Complainant - Respondent declined to issue 'No Objection Certificate' - View taken by District Forum that lease agreement was for two years, thereafter Respondent was entitled to take back possession of vehicle erroneous - Respondent guilty of deficiency in service - Impugned order set aside.

Appeal allowed.
 
IMPORTANT POINT

Seller held guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for not issuing 'No Objection Certificate' after receipt of full amount of vehicle.
 
ORDER
 
JD Kapoor, President - The complaint of the Appellant was dismissed vide impugned order dated 23.2.1994/8.4.1994 solely on the ground that the Appellant is not entitled to the relief sought by her, as the hire-purchase agreement entered into between the parties does not entitle her to any relief on account of deficiency in service on the part of the Respondent.

2.
Admittedly, the Appellant entered into an agreement with the respondent for the purchase of motor vehicle by paying initial amount of Rs. 23,400/- and the balance in equal monthly installments. The delivery of the vehicle was made to her on 30.6.1987, the date of agreement. In spite of the fact that the entire payment by way of instalments was made by the Appellant, the Respondent declined to issue 'No Objection Certificate' for transfer of the vehicle in her name. The District Forum interpreted the hire-purchase agreement as a lease agreement for the period of two years whereafter the Respondent was entitled to take back the possession of the said vehicle.

3.
The view taken by the District Forum is entirely erroneous and not in terms of the hire-purchase agreement. It is not understandable as to how the Respondent would become the owner of the vehicle after having received the full amount of the cost of the vehicle by way of initial deposit of Rs. 23,400/- and the remaining amount paid by way of instalments. Therefore, no other alternative is left with the Respondent but to provide 'No Objection Certificate' for transfer of the vehicle in question in the name of the Appellant and by not doing so, the Respondent is guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

4.
In view of the aforesaid reasons, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order. In the result, the complaint is allowed with directions to the Respondent to furnish No Objection Certificate within one month for transfer of the vehicle in the name of the Appellant, otherwise Transport Authority shall transfer the registration in favour of Appellant.

5.
FDR/Bank Guarantee, if any, deposited by the Appellant be returned to the Appellant forthwith under proper receipt.

6.
A copy of this order, as per the statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties, free of charge also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to the Record Room.

Appeal allowed.