VELJI KANJI PATEL Vs. LAXMI MOT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant applied for Premier 137-D car and paid the amount of Rs.15,000/- to the opposite party No.1laxmi Motors, Gandhidham on December 8, 1991 by demand draft. The opposite party No.1 demanded other amounts and, therefore, the complainant paid the amount of Rs.1,59,342/- on 15.9.92, Rs.10,700/-on 16.9.92 and Rs.950/- on 15.9.92. According to the complainant he paid an amount of Rs.1,85,992/- to the opposite party No.1. The opposite party No.1 also collected the amount of Rs.3,200/- in name of M/s. Agrawal Road lines and the complainant paid that amount by demand draft on 15.9.92. The grievance of the complainant is that inspite of the fact that full price of the car was paid, the delivery was not given to the complainant. The complainant therefore prayed for the direction to deliver the car with 18% interest on the amount paid and also to refund the amount of Rs.3,200/- collected by the opposite party No.1 for transportation and compensation @ Rs.5,000/- per month for the loss suffered by the complainant.

(2.) The opposite party No.1 by reply purported to be the application under Sec.17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 contended that the application is not tenable and the Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the transaction has taken place at Gandhidham and the offer was accepted at Gandhidham. He also contended that the valuation of the complaint is only Rs.55,000/- and, therefore, also this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. No other contention is raised by the opposite party No.1 till the date of the final hearing.

(3.) The opposite party No.2 was sent notice by registered post but it was returned with the endorsement "intimation" on the envelope. No endorsement is made by the postman that the notice was refused by the opposite party No.2. After that the complainant has not cared to get the notice served to the opposite party No.2.