SHIMLA AUTOMOBILES vs INDIRA RAM SHARMA

THIS appeal is directed against the order of the District Forum, Shimla, dated 19.8.1997, whereby the District Forum has awarded interest @ 18% per annum on the amount of Rs. 2,27,180/- deposited by the complainant/respondent, for 80 days. Cost of Rs. 1,000/- has also been awarded.

THE complaint has arisen, as delivery of the vehicle NC-640 4-Wheel drive vehicle (Truck) was made late. THE interest has been awarded on the purchase price, as according to the District Forum, the vehicle was delivered 80 days late. Mr. Ratish Sharma, learned Counsel for the appellants has raised preliminary objection that according to the showing of the complainant/ respondent himself, the vehicle has been purchased for domestic use and that the complainant/respondent is an orchardist and agriculturist. The Counsel, however, from the record shows that the complainant/respondent is a Sub-Divisional Officer working at Nathpa Jhakri and in the facts and circumstances since the vehicle has been purchased obviously for commercial purpose, he cannot be a consumer.

We regret we are unable to accept this contention. Admittedly, the vehicle was to be delivered within 10 to 12 weeks in terms of the contract on the deposit of the amount and admittedly the vehicle has not been delivered within this period, but delivered late after 32 days, if 12 weeks'' time given in the contract for delivery of the vehicle is taken into consideration. The Hon''ble Supreme Court in Mohinder Pratap Dass v. Modern Automobiles & Anr., (1995) 3 SCC 581, has held that the delivery of the vehicle within specified period is a part of the service to be performed by the seller i.e. the appellants. Obviously this service has not been performed by the appellants within stipulated period and the case clearly falls under Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and as such the complainant/respondent is held to be a consumer.

THE next contention raised by the Counsel for the appellants is that the interest awarded for 80 days is unreasonable and arbitrary, as the contract itself contemplates delivery of the vehicle within 10-12 weeks and if this period is excluded from the period by which the delivery of the vehicle was delayed, the delay is only for 32 days. There is substance in this submission. The appellants are only liable to pay interest @ 18% per annum on the amount for 32 days and not for 80 days. To this extent, the appeal succeeds and the order of the District Forum is modified accordingly and as such the complainant/ respondent shall be entitled to interest @ 18% per annum on the amount of Rs. 2,27,180/- for 32 days. There is no order as to costs in the appeal. Appeal partly allowed.