Judgment:
A. Venkatarami Reddy, President:
1. Questioning the order of the District Forum, Adilabad in C.D. 108/94 whereby it directed the opposite party i.e. Leafin India Ltd. to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 12,000/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from 23.11.93 till the date of realisation and Rs. 3,500/- towards repairs and costs of Rs. 200/- the opposite party i.e. Leafin India Ltd, preferred this appeal.
2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant was that the opposite party offered for sale a Bajaj Kawasaki Motorcycle bearing No. A.P-1/ A 1872. The said vehicle was seized by the opposite party from one of its debtors. The complainant contacted the opposite party No. 2 and agreed to purchase the motorcycle, for Rs. 12,000/- in as is where is condition as the vehicle was not road worthy and paid the said amount on 23.11.93 through Demand Draft for which the opposite party issued a receipt on 26.11.93. But the opposite parties did not hand over the relevant documents of the vehicle such as R.C. book, Insurance policy before taking delivery of the vehicle and said that they would give the same within 15 days. As the opposite parties failed to hand over the relevant documents of the vehicle, the complainant on 11.1.94 addressed a letter to the Senior Manager, Leafin India Ltd., Hyderabad requesting them to arrange for delivery of the vehicle and papers immediately. A telegram dated 18.1.94 was sent by the opposite parties alongwith a letter to the effect that the Assistant General Manager of opposite parties by name by Mr. Harish would contact personally the complainant. Therefore the complainant took delivery of the vehicle and gave the vehicle to a local mechanic for repairs which cost him Rs. 3,500/- and that it requires a further expenditure of Rs. 3,000/-. As the opposite parties failed to give the necessary documents, as the complainant had already invested a sum of Rs. 15,500/- the complaint was filed to direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 15,500/- with interest to the complainant and take back the delivery of the vehicle and also pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards compensation.
3. After service of notice, both the opposite parties remained absent.
4. The District Forum on a consideration of Exs. A-1 to A-11 filed by the complainant, came to the conclusion that there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties in not handing over the R.C. book and also insurance coverage policy and other papers and getting the vehicle transferred in the name of the complainant and directed the opposite parties to pay Rs. 12,000/- to the complainant with interest @ 12% from 23.11.93 and also a further sum of Rs. 3,500/- towards repairs and costs of Rs. 200/-.
5. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party.
6. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellant that as the owner of the vehicle from whom it was seized did not co-operate with the opposite party for getting the vehicle transferred in the name of the complainant the transfer could not be effected and hence there is no deficiency of service on their part.
7. No such plea was taken before the District Forum and no documents were filed before the District Forum to show that the opposite party took immediate steps for securing C-Book to the complainant for getting the vehicle transferred in his name. It also did not give the complainant the insurance papers etc. Moreover after making number of representations for the C-Book and other papers, the complainant addressed a letter on 11.1.94 to the opposite party to arrange for the delivery of the vehicle and papers immediately. To the said letter a telegram was received by the complainant on 18.1.94 alongwith a letter to the effect that the Assistant General Manager of the opposite party by name Mr. Harish would contact personally the complainant and look into the matter. But although the Assistant General Manager is said to have visited Adilabad, he did not meet the complainant and no papers were delivered. It is therefore clear that inspite of taking the delivery of the vehicle some time on 18.1.94, the opposite party did not send. the papers until 22.2.94 i.e. the date of the filing of the complaint. We are therefore satisfied that there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party as although it received the entire consideration on 23.11.93 it failed to give the C-Book and other necessary papers to the complainant till February, 1994.
8. It is next submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellant that according to the conditions of the sale, the complainant agreed to purchase the vehicle in as is where is condition and that therefore he cannot make any grievance that the opposite party did not give the C-Book and others papers. We are not inclined to accept the said contention. As is where is condition relates only to the physical condition of the vehicle and does not absolve the opposite party to hand over the C-Book and other papers to the complainant.
9. It is next submitted that the opposite party is not liable to pay Rs. 3,500/- incurred by the complainant towards the repairs of the vehicle. We are not inclined to accept this contention. As we are directing payment of the amount of Rs. 15,500/- and costs of Rs. 200/-, the complainant shall deliver back the vehicle to the opposite party. As it is getting back the vehicle after effecting repairs costing Rs. 3,500/-, we are of the view that the opposite party is liable to pay in addition to consideration of Rs. 12,000/- the amount of Rs. 3,500/- incurred by the complainant towards the repairs and costs.
10. It is next submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellant that in the operative portion of the order of the District Forum, there is no direction to return the vehicle to the opposite party. It is true that there was no mention about the return of the vehicle in the operative portion of the order, of the District Forum, we therefore, hold that on payment of the amount as directed by the District Forum the complainant shall return the vehicle to the opposite parties.
11. With the aforesaid direction that the complainant should return the vehicle to the opposite party on payment of the entire amount by the opposite party as directed by the District Forum, this appeal is dismissed. Six weeks time is granted from to day 3.4.95 for payment of the amount by the opposite party to the complainant. There shall be no order as to costs in this appeal.
Appeal dismissed.