State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Finance Department, Telco vs Harsh Vardhan Singh Kharai on 10 April, 2008
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND
DEHRA DUN
FIRST APPEAL NO. 57 / 2005
Finance Department, Telco
K-Block, Pipri, Pune - 101
......Appellant / Opposite Party No. 3
Versus
1. Sh. Harsh Vardhan Singh Kharai
S/o Sh. N.S. Kharai
R/o Bansbhira, Chinakhan, Almora
.....Respondent No. 1 / Complainant
2. Proprietor Mega Motors
Branch Haldwani Road, Tikoniya
District Nainital
.....Respondent No. 2 / Opposite Party No. 1
3. Commissioner of Central Excise
Central Excise Department, New Delhi
.....Respondent No. 3 / Opposite Party No. 2
Sh. S.K. Gupta, Learned Counsel for the Appellant
Sh. M.K. Kohli, Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1
Sh. V.K. Vashishth, Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 2
None for Respondent No. 3
Coram: Hon'ble Justice Irshad Hussain, President
C.C. Pant, Member
Dated: 10/04/2008
ORDER
(Per: Justice Irshad Hussain, President):
This is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 12.01.2005 passed by the District Forum, Almora, whereby the complainant was held entitled to refund of excise duty with interest from the appellant for and in connection with the excise duty realised on the vehicle registered as taxi, to be plied by the complainant.2
2. None appeared on behalf of respondent No. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and considered their submissions in the light of the admitted facts and legal aspects of the case.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant persuasively argued that the order impugned is without jurisdiction in as much as the District Forum, Almora has had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the consumer complaint and thereafter to pass the impugned order. The plea in that regard had been taken at the earliest opportunity when the written statement was filed and it had been pleaded that neither any of the opposite parties in the complaint reside or carry on business within the jurisdiction of the District Forum, Almora, nor cause of action or any part thereof has arisen within the jurisdiction of the said Forum. It is not in dispute that the complainant Sh. Harsh Vardhan Singh Kharai took loan from the bank at Almora. He purchased vehicle to be plied as taxi from manufacturer's dealer M/s Mega Motors, Haldwani, District Nainital from its branch at Bareilly. The manufacturer has its office and manufacturing unit at Pune in Maharashtra. It is, therefore, not in dispute that neither of the opposite parties reside or carry on business within the jurisdiction of the District Forum, Almora and since the vehicle was also not purchased in Almora, no part of cause of action has also arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of the said Forum. Merely by taking loan from bank situate at Almora, it could not be said that cause of action for refund of excise duty has arisen at Almora. It is also of significance that bank was not the party in the proceedings and has had no concern with the dispute raised in the case. Therefore, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the provision of Section 11 (2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the District Forum at Almora has had no jurisdiction to entertain and try 3 the complaint filed by the complainant. On identical facts and circumstances, this Commission has taken similar view per its order dated 01.12.2006 in First Appeal No. 142 of 2005; M/s Mega Motors Vs. Sh. Bhuwan Chandra Joshi and others. In taking the said view, this Commission had adverted to two decisions of the Hon'ble National Commission in the matter of Puran Chand Wadhwa Vs. Hamil Era Textiles Limited; 2004 NCJ 60 (NC) and Starline Motors Vs. Naval Kishore Chiman Lal Bhartia and another; I (1998) CPJ 79 (NC).
4. Considering the decision of this Commission on identical facts, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have not taken any exception to the plea raised by the appellant. Therefore, there is no alternative, but to allow the appeal and set aside the order impugned and to direct return of the complaint to the complainant for presentation before the Forum having territorial jurisdiction in the matter.
5. Appeal is allowed. Order dated 12.01.2005 of the District Forum is set aside. The complaint is directed to be returned to the complainant, so that it may be presented before the Forum having territorial jurisdiction to entertain the same and decide the consumer dispute raised by the complainant. Let the copy of the order be also sent to the District Forum, Almora for compliance at the earliest. No order as to cost.
(C.C. PANT) (JUSTICE IRSHAD HUSSAIN) Kawal