K.P. Mohan vs Concorde Motors (India) Limited

THE present revision petition has been filed by Shri K. P. Mohan, the complainant/petitioner. The complainant booked a new Tata Manza Aura Satire BS4 with $ delivery date of 28.4.2011 for a total sale consideration of the said vehicle at Rs.6,53,372/- and also paid a sum of Rs.45.000/- as advance on 18.3.2011. On 19.3.2011, the representative of opposite parties 1 and 2 offered a further discount of Rs. 10,000/- on the booked price '' if the total sale consideration of the vehicle was paid by the revisionist on or before 31.3.2011. The proforma invoice was also issued for a sum of Rs.6,43,372/-. The complainant applied for car loan of Rs.4,13,000/- with State Bank of India. The State Bank of India sanctioned car loan on 29.3.2011. The complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,97,736/- to the opposite party No. 1. The State Bank of India disbursed the amount of the said vehicle loan of Rs.4,13,000/-, which was collected by one Sagar, the representative of opposite party No. 1, directly from the banker of the complainant.

THE complainant called upon the opposite party for the delivery of the said desired vehicle car on 8.4.2011. However, in the meantime, the price of the said car stood increased and the complainant was called upon to pay a sum of Rs 18,515/- more. The complainant made several representations but the opposite party did not respond. A legal notice was sent on 27.5.2011. As the opposite parties were charging Rs. 18,515/- more, therefore, the complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 before the District Forum, Bangalore was filed. The District Forum vide its order dated 23.9.2011 partly allowed the complaint against the respondents No. 1 and 2 and directed the complainant to pay a sum of Rs. 11,987.54 within a week and directed the respondent No. 1 and 2 to deliver the car as booked by the complainant on 19.3.2011 within 30 days from the date of the order. It was further ordered '' that in the event of failure on the part of the respondents, they would pay interest to the complainant and also return the amount as paid by the complainant. The District .Forum also awarded cost of litigation in the sum of Rs.2,000/-. Thereafter, the complainant sent a cheque for the amount of Rs.11,987.54 payable to the respondents, without prejudice. It is alleged that the respondents have failed to comply with the orders and have not delivered the car.

THEREAFTER , the appeal was filed before the State Commission, Bangalore. The State Commission dismissed the appeal of the complainant. However, it directed the respondents to comply with the directions of the learned District Forum.

NOW the present revision petition has been filed with the prayer to set aside the order passed by the State Commission and direct the opposite party to immediately deliver the booked vehicle to the revisionist alongwith 18% interest on the cost of the vehicle from the date of payment till the date of delivery of the vehicle alongwith proper compensation and damages to the revisionist. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. He argued that since the complainant had paid entire consideration in advance, therefore, the respondent cannot charge extra amount of Rs. 18,515/-. He contended that the instant case is clearly distinguishable from other case where the money is to be paid through instalments. He however admitted that as per Quotation Cum Proforma Invoice placed on the record, it is clearly mentioned in the terms of sale (i) the above prices are currently prevailing ex-showroom prices. Buyers will have to pay Prices at the time of delivery. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner was not aware of this condition.

WE find no merit in this argument because the said document was issued on 19.3.2011. The complainant should have raised the objection on 19.3.2011 itself. Again, this is admitted fact that the complainant wanted the car having jet Silver colour only. It is also admitted fact that the price of car was hiked w.e.f. 1.4.2011. The District Forum has rightly granted the interest on Rs.6,52,736 @ 12% per annum for one month and deducted the same from the additional amount claimed by the opposite parties and order the complainant to pay the balance amount in the sum of Rs.11,98,987.54 paisa only. The complainant was also awarded cost of Rs.2,000/-. We see no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. The order passed by both the forum stand confirmed. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed.

IT is also made clear that in case the opposite parties are not complying with the directions of the State Commission, the complainant can file execution proceedings against the opposite parties. The order already stands passed which has to be executed as per law. Revision Petition dismissed.