PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER

                   This is a revision petition under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) filed by the OP i.e. Hind Motors (India) against orders dated 18.3.2011 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, UT, Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred as the District Forum only) in Execution Application No. 91 of 2010 whereby the learned District Forum made the following order :-

          Payment of the balance decreetal amount on behalf of the OP not made.

          It is directed that a certificate under Section 25(3) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 be sent to the concerned District Collector along with copy of the order dated 13.9.2004 (appeal No.239/2004), authorizing him to recover the amount from OP. Now for awaiting the report of the District Collector to come up on 10.5.2011.

2.                        Brief facts of the case, are that the complainant/respondent had purchased a car from the petitioner/OP, which started giving trouble. The defects in the car were not repaired/rectified by the OP/petitioner to the satisfaction of the complainant/respondent, upon which the complaint was filed by the respondent under Section 12 of the Act, against the petitioner and Tata Motors Ltd., (the manufacturer), which was opposed  by the OPs. The learned District Forum vide its order dated 16.4.2004 directed both the OPs including the petitioner to pay Rs.1,45,000/- to the complainant as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as costs of litigation. If the amount was not paid within 2 months from the receipt of copy of the order, they were to pay interest on the amount of Rs.1,45,000/- @6% p.a. from the date of order i.e. 16.4.2004 till payment. Both the OPs filed an appeal before this Commission, which was decided vide order dated 13.9.2004 vide which the compensation amount was reduced to Rs.70,000/-. They were also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as costs of litigation and Rs.500/- as costs in appeal. It was ordered that if the amount of Rs.70,000/-  was not paid within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, it was to carry interest @6% p.a.

3.                        Both the OPs filed separate revision petitions before the Hon’ble National Commission, which were decided together vide order dated 24.5.2010. The appeal filed by the manufacturer i.e. Tata Motors Ltd. was allowed whereas the, appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed. It was ordered that the entire amount ordered by this Commission shall be paid by the petitioner alone.

4.                        The complainant then filed Execution Application under Section 25 of the Act before the learned District Forum, in which a notice was issued to the petitioner. On 3.3.2011 the petitioner tendered a cheque of Rs.72,500/-  in part compliance of the order. The case was fixed for 11.3.2011 for making the payment of the remaining amount and thereafter to 18.3.2011 but when the remaining amount was not paid the learned District Forum passed the impugned order dated 18.3.2011, issuing the certificate under Section 25(3) of the Act to recover the remaining amount due from the petitioner.  The petitioner/OP challenged the same through this revision petition.

5.                        The contention of the petitioner in this revision petition is that during the pendency of the appeal Tata Motors Ltd. had deposited Rs.70,000/- before this Commission and the same was withdrawn by them on 11.1.2011 therefore, no interest should be paid to the complainant on the said amount for the period during which the amount remained deposited before this Commission.

6.                        Notice of the revision petition was issued to the complainant/respondent, who has opposed the same.

7.                        We have heard the arguments of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and respondent in person and have perused the record.

8.                        It is an admitted case of the parties that no amount was deposited by the petitioner before this Commission or before the learned District Forum. It is true that  Tata Motor Ltd. had deposited an amount of Rs.70,000/- before this Commission but when the Hon’ble National Commission held that Tata Motors Ltd. was not liable for any deficiency in service and the revision petition filed by Tata Motors Ltd. was accepted, the said amount was withdrawn by the said party. No amount or interest is being claimed by the complainant  from Tata Motors Ltd. and therefore, the  deposit made by Tata Motors Ltd. or withdrawal thereof on 11.1.2011 is immaterial, so far as the liability of petitioner to pay the amount awarded by the State Commission or the interest thereon is concerned.  The petitioner therefore, cannot get any benefit for the deposit of the said amount by Tata Motors Ltd.  Otherwise also, when the Tata Motors Ltd. deposited the amount no notice of the deposit was given to the complainant/respondent.  The Tata Motors Ltd. did not even request this Commission to pay the said amount to the complainant.  In fact the said amount was deposited by TATA Motors Ltd. just to buy peace, so that the District Forum does not issue any  process against it. Since the amount has not been paid to the complainant, he would be entitled to interest.

9.               There is no dispute about it that the petitioner was  liable to pay Rs.70,000/- as compensation  and Rs. 2,000/- as costs and Rs.500/- as costs of appeal. The said amount was not paid/deposited by the OP/petitioner till 3.3.2011.   The complainant therefore, would be entitled to interest on the amount of Rs.70,000/- @6% p.a. w.e.f. 16.4.2004 till 3.3.2011. The petitioner has paid only the principal amount but it has not paid the amount of interest.  The complainant is therefore, entitled to recover interest and if the same is not paid, the learned District Forum is well within its powers to recover the said amount under Section 25 of the Act.

10. In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the impugned order passed by the learned District Forum is perfectly legal and valid. There is no merit in the revision petition and the same is accordingly, dismissed with costs of Rs.5000/-.

                   Copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge.