Back
DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.D. Kapoor, President & Ms. Rumnita Mittal, Member
AALLANZ AUTOMOBILES—Appellant
versus
M.K. JAIN—Respondent
Appeal No. A-717 of 2004—Decided on 29.9.2004
Counsels for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mr. Rakesh Sinha, Advocate.
For the Respondent: None.
Receipt of excess payment warrants a refund, regardless of disputed promised discounts and free accessories.
Headnote:
Maruti Dealer - Sale of Car - Excess Payment and Refund
Fact of the Case:
The respondent purchased a car from the appellant and alleged that the appellant had offered discounts and free accessories, which the appellant denied. The appellant received an excess amount of Rs. 12,179.30 from the respondent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant had received an excess amount from the respondent and upheld the order for the appellant to refund the excess amount with interest.
Issues: Dispute over promised discounts and free accessories, and the appellant's receipt of excess payment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that even if the promised discounts and free accessories were not proven, the appellant had still received an excess amount from the respondent, which warranted a refund.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to refund the excess amount received from the respondent.
Mr. Justice J.D. Kapoor, President—The appellant is a Maruti dealer. The respondent purchased a Maruti Zen LXI MPFI Car with Stereo system and Central Locking from the appellant on payment of Rs. 3,75,000/- by way of two receipts, one dated 10.10.2002 for Rs. 1,75,000/- and another dated 25.10.2002 for Rs. 2,00,000/-. In spite of having received payment of Rs. 3,75,000/- the appellant issued invoice bearing No. 21216 for Rs. 3,62,830.50 towards the price of the car. The respondent alleged that the appellant had offered to give discount of Rs, 9,000/- in the price of the car, free comprehensive insurance for one year, registration and road tax, etc. and accessories worth Rs. 5,000/-. The appellant denied having given such a promise.
2. Vide impugned order dated 2.8.2004 the appellant has been ordered to refund Rs. 12,179.30 with 9% interest from the date of payment which he had received over and above the actual price of the car.
3. We do not find any infirmity in the impugned order as the District Forum has not directed to refund the discount amount of Rs. 9,000/-, the amount of free comprehensive insurance for one year and also amount of registration and road tax and accessories worth Rs. 5,000/-. This is common experience that the dealers of the car do promise some discount when there either is fall in the sale of the cars or there is competition or to promise the sale. However, even if we accept the contention of the Counsel for the appellant that the appellant did not promise to provide aforesaid discount and free comprehensive insurance for one year, registration and road tax etc and accessories worth Rs. 5,000/-, still the fact remains that the appellant had received excess amount Rs. 12,179.30 from the respondent and it was not for nothing.
4. We do no find any merit in the appeal and dismiss the same in limine.
5. A copy of this order as per statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to record room. The FDR if any deposited by the appellant be returned to the appellant after completing necessary formalities.
Appeal dismissed.
–
