CHINMOY CHANDA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE & DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Appeal is directed against the order dated 6.11.2008 passed by the North 24 Parganas District Consumer Forum in D.F. Case No. 12(s)/2007, wherein the complaint was rejected holding inter alia that the proceeding was untenable before the Forum. The aggrieved complainant filed the instant Appeal on the grounds that the Forum below acted illegally with material irregularity at the time of passing the judgement. He was a bona fide consumer in terms of Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Forum below ought to have considered the provisions of West Bengal Motor Vehicles Tax Act, 1979 and West Bengal Motor Vehicles Act.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the complainant, a senior citizen, despite his financial hardship was maintaining a car for taking his 75% disabled daughter to the treatment centre and two doctors for her treatment and also to her education centre. On 27.5.2005 he made a prayer to the District Magistrate and District Collector, North 24 Parganas, the sole respondent herein, for exemption of road tax in respect of his car in view of its being used for his handicapped daughter. His prayer was rejected on 17.8.2005. He appealed for reconsideration of his prayer. It was forwarded to the District Social Welfare Officer, North 24 Parganas, who later forwarded the same to the Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, Government of West Bengal. The said appeal was thereafter forwarded to the Joint Secretary, Transport Department, Government of West Bengal, who by its Memo No. 557/1(1) -WT dated 16.2.2006 expressed inability to consider the said prayer. The appellant thereafter on 17.3.2006 made a prayer before the Chairman, Human Rights Commission, West Bengal for proper consideration of his aforesaid prayer concerning exemption of the road tax. He received no response from the Commission. He then decided to pay the road tax and approached the R.T.O., Barasat, to know the amount he was required to pay for the purpose. He came to learn that in view of delay in making payment he was to pay penalty to the tune of Rs. 2,850 apart from the amount of tax. The Taxing Officer, North 24 Parganas, also intimated this to him under Memo No. 2597/MB/BST dated 7.9.2006. The appellant was of the view that the delay in making payment of the road tax was not caused deliberately by him. He prayed for an order for waiving the amount of penalty and for permission to pay the road tax in instalments.

(3.) THE case was contested by the OP/District Magistrate and Dist. Collector, North 24 Parganas, by filing written version. The R.T.O., Barasat filed the written oath on behalf of the District Magistrate and Collector, North 24 Parganas. The case has been discussed by the Forum below in detail. There is hardly any scope for us to interfere with the same. The Forum was of the view that though the complainant made payment of Motor Vehicles Tax earlier respecting the vehicle and that he also promised to make payment of such tax for subsequent period, but such making of payment of tax or of promising to make payment of tax cannot be regarded to be making of payment or promising of making of payment of consideration to the OP for availing of a service. The complainant, therefore, cannot be regarded to have been a consumer in terms of the Consumer Protection Act.