S.RAJASHEKAR vs LOHIA MACHINES LTD., M/S. LML CUSTOMERS SERVICE CELL

THE appellant deposited a sum of Rs. 500/- on 4.2.1983 and booked a Scooter with the Respondents as per Exhibit C-1. By a letter dated 3.1.1987, the appellant cancelled the booking and requested the respondents to refund the advance amount of Rs. 500/- together with interest thereon. THE Respondents did not return the advance together with interest. Hence the appellant filed a complaint before the District Forum, Bangalore. THE Respondents remained absent after due service. On the materials produced by the appellant, the District Forum directed the Respondents to pay Rs. 500/- with interest thereon at the rate of 7% per annum from 4.2.1983 till the date of payment. Being dissatisfied with the said Order, the complainant has preferred this appeal. Respondents have remained absent after due service in this appeal also.

MR. H.C. Ravindranath, learned counsel for the appellant brought to our notice, the xerox copy of the Judgment of the District Forum, Kanpur in Complaint No. 147/89-90 between MR. R .T. Ajwani v. Mis. LML Scooters, wherein it has been held that the complainant who had deposited the amount at the time of booking the scooter, is a consumer. The said finding & order has been accepted by LML Ltd., which is also a Party in this appeal. So, the said finding is binding on the Respondents. Hence we hold that the appellant is a consumer. Moreover, the respondents have not preferred an appeal against the order of the District Forum. Mr. H.C. Ravindranath, for the appellant urged that the District Forum should have awarded interest at the rate of 18% per annum. From Exhibit C-2, it is clear that the Respondents have agreed to pay interest at 9% per annum. That has also been accepted by the appellant. Hence we hold that the appellant is entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 4.2.1983 to 14.3.1987. As the Appellant had cancelled the booking by his letter dated 3.1.1987, the Respondents should have refunded the amount within 60 days along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. They have failed to do so. Hence we think it proper to award some penal interest from 14.3.1987 onwards and fix that rate at 11% per annum, as there is no evidence to show that the complainant had borrowed the amount and was paying interest at the rate of 18% per annum.

Mr. H.C. Ravindranath, also urged that the complainant is entitled to some compensation as the respondents have failed to return the said amount in time as agreed to by them. We have awarded interest for the delay on the amount of deposit. Hence we think that the appellant is not entitled to any compensation.

IN the result, the order of the District Forum, Bangalore, is modified by directing the Respondents to pay Rs. 680/- with interest at the rate of 11 % per annum from 14.3.1987 till the date of payment and costs of Rs. 100/- of the complaint and this appeal within one month from today. With the said modification, the Appeal is dismissed. Order modified.