SIPANI AUTOMOBILES LTD. vs KEWAL KRISHAN DUGGAL

M/s. Sipani Automobiles, Bangalore, have come up in appeal against the order dated 30.6.1997 passed by the learned District Consumer Forum, Ambala, where by the complaint of Kewal Krishan Duggal respondent alleging deficiency in service on the part of the appellants M/s. Sipani Automobiles and Mr. Rajesh Diwan, Manager, M/s. Wheels World, Ambala Cantt. in the mater of supply of car and the refund of the amount deposited with them at the time of booking the car on 6.12.1990, has been allowed.

THE complainant had approached the District Consumer Forum, Ambala, with the grievance mat even though he had booked a car on 6.12.1990 by depositing Rs. 20,000/-, and on 20.2.1991 allotment letter had also been issued to him yet as the respondents in their letter dated 20.4.1991 informed him that the car could not be provided as earlier intimated vide their letter dated 20.2.1991, he requested for the refund of the amount deposited by him. THE opposite party however failed to accede to his request despite repeated reminders and representations from time to time. Aggrieved by this, the complainant approached the District Consumer Forum, Bathinda, on 7.1.1991 and the complaint was accepted by issuing a direction to the opposite parties for the refund of the amount with interest. However, on appeal, the State Commission vide order dated 21.8.1996 set aside the order of the District Consumer Forum, Bathinda, by holding that it lacked territorial jurisdiction and returned the complaint for being filed before the District Consumer Forum having territorial jurisdiction in the matter. Complying with the same, the complainant presented the present complaint before the District Consumer Forum, Ambala. In their reply, the respondents admitted the fact of deposit of Rs. 20,000/- by way of booking amount by the complainant at the time of booking the car but nothing tangible was pleaded for contesting the claim. Accordingly, the District Consumer Forum, allowed the complaint with a direction to the opposite party No. 1 to refund the amount of Rs. 20,000/- with interest at the rate of 18% with effect from 9.4.1991 till its payment.

In the appeal before us, the learned Counsel for the appellants has vehemently contended that as the complaint was filed after a lapse of three years from the date of booking it was barred by time. We do not agree with the submission as the car was booked on 6.12.1990 and the allotment letter was issued on 20.2.1991 when the period of limitation was three years and not two years as it was only with effect from 18.7.1993 that the amendment reduced the period of limitation from 3 to 2 years. Moreover, the present complaint filed by the complainant at Ambala was only the presentation of the same complaint for the second time which had been filed by him at Bathinda. The earlier complaint having been allowed and at the stage of appeal the complainant having been permitted to present the same at Ambala, since District Consumer Forum at Bathinda had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain this complaint, the present complaint was certainly within limitation.

THE learned Counsel for the appellants further contended that no doubt the amount in question was deposited by the complainant but the receipt of the amount was issued by respondent No. 2, i.e. Mr. Rajesh Diwan, Manager of M/s. Wheels World, Ambala Cantt. We do not find any merit in this contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants as the amount deposited by the complainant and received by M/s. Rajesh Diwan - dealers and agent of M/ s. Sipani Automobiles (the appellants) -was in the eyes of law the payment received by the appellants themselves on the basis of the simple principle, that an amount received by the agent is the amount received by the principal. Consequently, the appeal is wholly without any merit and the same is dismissed with costs, which are quantified at Rs. 2,000/-. THE appellants are directed to make the payment of the amount as awarded by the District Consumer Forum, Ambala, alongwith costs within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order. Appeal dismissed with costs. _________________