ENKON Vs. FRENCH MOTOR CAR COMPANY PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner/complainant lodged this complaint inter alia alleging that it had paid the sum of Rs.4,46,440/- including registration fees to the Opposite Party No.1 against purchase of Diesel Car known as Tata Estate. The final payment was made within 12.2.93. Accordingly the Diesel Car was supposed to be delivered within one month from the date of final payment. It was further alleged that the Opposite Party No.1 failed and neglected to deliver the said Diesel Car to the petitioner/complainant inspite of several correspondences dated 16.3.93 and 8.4.93 made by the petitioner/complainant and the said letters have been made annexures as "j" and "k" with the petition of complaint. It was further alleged that the complainant/ petitioner took loan of Rs.3,00,000/- on interest from the City Bank for making payment of the said sum to the Opposite Party No.1 and as the Opposite Party No.1 withheld delivery of the Diesel Car, it was deprived from utilising the same and suffered monetary loss which is still continuing as such the Opposite Party No.1 is liable to compensate to the petitioner/ complainant to the tune of Rs.85,0007calculated upto 29th April, 1993 and also sought for cost of the proceedings etc.

(2.) The case of the Opposite Parties that the petitioner/complainant is not a consumer as per provision of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 . It contended that it is an authorised dealer of the Opposite Party No.2 and both the Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2 are the companies within the meaning of the Companies Act. The Opposite Party No.1 is a manufacturer of Motor vehicle of various models and one of the models of Diesel Car manufactured by Opposite Party No.2 is known as Tata Estate and the Opposite Party No.1 is also the dealer of the Opposite Party No.2 is respect of the said Tata Estate model of Diesel Car manufactured by the Opposite Party No.2. It is admitted by the Opposite Party No.1 that the complainant paid the sum of Rs.4,46,440/- including registration fees by 12.2.93. It is contended by the Opposite Party No.1 that on the basis of the said payment the Sales Invoice-cum-delivery Challan Nos.30436, 30437 and 30438 all dated February 26th, 1993 issued for three Tata Estate Diesel vehicles one of which meant for the petitioner/complainant and the said vehicle was to be taken out from the custody of the Opposite Party No.2 by virtue of Gate Pass No.7103 dated 1st March, 1993. It is stated by the Opposite Party No.1 that due to budget concession allowed by the Central Government for the financial year 1993-94, the price of the automobiles fell down to some extent and in view of this changed circumstances, the Opposite Party No.2 issued a revised price list for its diesel vehicles and such revised price list was effective from 1st March, 1993. It is contended that when the said three Tata Estate diesel vehicles became available with the Opposite Party No.1 for onwards delivery to three customers on the basis priority numbers and against full payment of price, the Opposite Party No.1 duly informed the petitioner/complainant for taking delivery of the vehicle as it was readily available. It is contended by the Opposite Party No.1 that the petitioner/complainant by its letter dated 16.3.93 informed the Opposite Party No.1 that it was not willing to take delivery of the vehicle at the old price since after the budget for the year 1993-94 the price of the vehicle had fallen down and desired to have delivery of the vehicle at a reduced price.

(3.) A copy of the said letter written by the petitioner/complainant to the Opposite Party No.1 has been made annexure 'd' to the opposition.