MODERN AUTOMOBILES vs NEELAM CHAND

CASE of the complainant before the District Forum was that in order to earn his livelihood he wanted to purchase a Maruti Omni Van (4 seater) for plying the same as a taxi after securing loan from Himachal Gramin Bank, Drubbal, District Mandi. On 24. 12. 1996 the complainant paid an amount of Rs. 1,83,754. 52 as cost of the vehicle through Demand Draft in favour of opposite party No. 1 - Maruti Udyog Limited to the opposite party No. 2 - M/s. Modern Automobiles the dealer. The dealer wrote a letter asking him whether he would like to have the new version of Maruti Omni-E (8 seater) with reduced price of Rs. 1,54,258. 90 which was replied by the complainant stating that he wanted only Maruti Omni Van (4 seater ).

THE crux of the complaint is that the dealer supplied Maruti Omni -E (8 seater) van to the complainant by removing one full bench consisting of three seats and by omitting the word ''e'' in the sale certificate by adopting unfair trade practice. Accordingly, he requested to refund the overcharged amount of Rs. 21,495. 62 with interest at 20% per annum and compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,000. The District Forum held that no expert evidence has been led by the complainant to prove his point that 8 seater Maruti Omni Model was supplied by removing one full bench consisting of three seats and as he was using the vehicle as a taxi, it was for commercial use and he cannot be termed as a consumer. Accordingly, the complaint was dismissed.

Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the complainant filed an appeal before the State Commission wherein he had added Assistant Central Excise Commissioner, Gurgaon, Haryana as the third respondent as he is entitled to rebate in the Central Excise Duty which has not been paid to him.

THE State Commission held that M/s. Modern Automobiles have been proceeded ex parte as they never appeared before the State Commission and the complainant has filed the affidavit by way of evidence wherein he has clearly stated that the dealer despite protest, supplied Maruti Omni -E (8 seater) by removing one of its benchs in his presence and he has not paid him the difference of the costs. As there was no rebuttal to such an averment, the State Commission directed that the complainant shall be entitled to this differential amount of Rs. 21,495. 62 with 18% interest from the date of deposit i. e. , 24. 12. 1996 till the date of payment. As regards Excise rebate, the complainant was directed to submit the required documents to the dealer who will send them to Maruti Udyog Limited who will in turn send them to the Assistant Collector, Central Excise will decide the matter in accordance with the law. In case the complainant is found entitled to the rebate, the refund will be made within a period of three months. Dissatisfied by the order of the State Commission the dealer has filed this revision petition. Notice issued to the respondent was returned with postal remarks ''incomplete address''. Accordingly, petitioner was permitted to publish the same in Himachal Times. Despite publication in the newspaper, the respondent did not appear before us.

THE learned Counsel for the revision petitioner invited our attention to the following documents: * Order booking form with allotment No. 6401-V-80071 dated 23. 12. 1996 for Rs. 1,74,235 of Modern Automobiles; * Letter dated 25. 12. 1996 addressed to Sales and Despatch Department of Maruti Udyog Limited enclosing the Demand Draft dated 23. 12. 1996 for Maruti Omni for an amount of Rs. 1,74,235. * Letter dated 28. 1. 1997 from Modern Automobiles to the complainant whether he would like to have Maruti Omni-E (8 seater) at a reduced price of Rs. 1,64,258. 90 which is still to be approved as a taxi or the earlier model booked by him; * Letter of the complainant dated 1. 2. 1997 agreeing for the earlier model; * Invoice of Maruti Udyog Limited dated 26. 3. 1997 indicating the Chassis No. as 196895 and Engine No. as 1473113; * Invoice of Modern Automobiles dated 28. 3. 1997 addressed to the complainant with the same chassis number and engine number; * Delivery receipt signed by the complainant with the same chassis number and engine number; * Sale certificate addressed to the Regional Transport Authority dated 9. 4. 1997 indicating the same chassis and engine number. * Form of Certificate of Regis-tration issued by the State Transport Authority indicates the same chassis and engine number; * Certificate issued by the State Transport Authority, Shimla dated 7. 12. 1996 stating that the said vehicle was registered as a taxi with the authority bearing same chassis and engine number.

In view of the above documents, it is difficult to hold that the complainant was given an eight seater Maruti Omni Van by removing one bench consisting of three seats, and hence, he is entitled to differential amount. Regarding excise duty rebate, it is clear from the document presented before us that a cheque for a sum of Rs. 17,938. 39 issued by Maruti Udyog Limited on 18. 2. 1999 to the complainant was not delivered to the complainant. The complainant had written a letter to the dealer to deposit the cheque with the District Forum, Mandi, Himachal Pradesh so as to enable him to withdraw the same at execution stage. Though this was received by the dealer on 6th August, 1999 he had not deposited the same before the District Forum. On the other hand, on 30. 8. 1999 the dealer had written a letter to Maruti Udyog Limited for revalidating this cheque as six months period had expired. Accordingly, we direct the petitioner to pay this amount to the complainant with 6% interest from 6. 8. 1999 on which date the dealer had received the above letter from the complainant, till the date of payment. He shall deposit the amount with the District Forum, Mandi within a period of four weeks. The District Forum shall arrange to deliver the amount to the complainant.

REVISION petition is disposed of in above terms. There shall be no order as to cost. Revision Petition disposed of.