The “centrifugal force” is not an interaction between two objects. For that matter, neither is the “centripetal force.” “Centrifugal” and “centripetal” are directions. The “-fugal” means “fleeing” (related to “fugitive”); the “-petal” means “pointing towards.”
If you’re new to this business (as you say in a comment), don’t leap to the accelerated reference frame attached to the turning vehicle. Accelerated reference frames are complicated. First analyze the problem from the inertial reference frame of the road. The vehicle travels down the straight section of the road at constant velocity. When the vehicle gets to the curve in the road, it’ll still move in a straight line (to the horror of everyone inside) unless some force changes its velocity. That force must have some net component in the centripetal, center-pointing, direction. It might be friction between the road and the tires. It might be that the road is “banked” so that the normal force has a centripetal component. It might be that both of these fail and the vehicle is pushed centerward by the guardrail on the outside of the curve (to the horror of everyone inside).
If the force needed to steer the car along the circle is greater than the maximum static friction between the tires and the road, the tire-to-road interaction will switch from static/rolling friction to sliding. The car may still follow a curved path — but if the radius of curvature is different from the radius of curvature for the road, then the car is going to end up in the ditch.
When you write
Since we are in the frame of car, we are in equilibrium. In that case net force on us must be 0 no matter what.
you are assuming that this reference frame exists, that the car occupies it, and that you can ask questions about it. The idea that “we must be in equilibrium” is a common beginner mistake. There is no such rule. For your velocity to change, you must be in disequilibrium, with a nonzero net force.
The illusory (but, in limited circumstances, computationally helpful) “centrifugal force” arises when you look at the car within an accelerating, non-inertial reference frame. Suppose that your car is parked. You balance your hot coffee cup on the steering wheel and (to the horror of everyone present) stomp on the gas pedal, lurching the car forward. Was the coffee thrown backwards into your lap by a “front-fugal” force? You could say so if you liked; but it’s more parsimonious to say that the coffee was trying to stay in the same place, while the car moved out from underneath it.