DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FOR`UM, BATHINDA.

CC.No.452 of 10-09-2012

Decided on 07-12-2012

Narinderjit Kaur aged about 50 years w/o Kuldeep Singh r/o C-811, Thermal Colony, Bathinda, Tehsil & Distt.Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

1.District Transport Officer, District Transport Office, Mini Secretariat Bathinda.

2.Government of Punjab, through Deputy Commission, Bathinda.

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.

Sh.Amarjeet Paul, Member.

Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member.

Present:-

For the Complainant: Sh.S.K Sharma, counsel for complainant.

For Opposite parties: Sh.O.P Vinocha, counsel for opposite parties.

ORDER

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant had purchased Ford Figo 1.5 Diesel Titanium Car bearing engine No.84171, chesis No.MRJ1BC84171 from M/s A.B Motors Pvt. Ltd vide invoice No.LDH/4669/2010-2011 dated 25.1.2011 for a sum of Rs.4,84,431/- and paid 12.5% VAT on the price of the said car amounting to Rs.60,554/- and surcharge on VAT @ 10% amounting to Rs.6055/- and a total sum of Rs.5,51,040/- to M.S.A.B. Motors Pvt.Ltd, Ludhiana. The complainant applied for the registration of the said car in her name with the opposite party No.1 and they asked her to deposit the amount as per the bill, she had paid a total sum of Rs.5,51,040/- and the registration fee is payable @ 4% on the said value which has exceeded Rs.5 lacs. The complainant requested the opposite party No.1 that as per the rules and regulations of the Government i.e. under the provisions of section 3 (4) of Punjab Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1924 as amended upto date, the tax on the motor car and motorcycle shall be leviable in lump-sum which shall be counted on the actual price of such vehicle (Excluding taxes, if any) as such rate, as may be determined by the Government from time to time besides exceeding the rate, as has been specified in the schedule as such no registration fee is payable on the amount of VAT rather the same is payable on the actual price of the said car that is Rs.4,84,431/- i.e. less than Rs.5 lacs and 2% fee is payable for the registration of the said car. The opposite party No.1 has charged 4% fee as road tax for the registration of the said car and the complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.22,355/- vide receipt No.764768 dated 8.3.2011 and she was issued the token No.66561/2011 dated 8.3.2011 regarding the tentative date for the delivery of the registration certificate on 25.3.2011. Thereafter the opposite parties issued the registration No.PB-03X-3772. The complainant was liable to pay the registration fee @ 2% on the actual price of the said car i.e. Rs.4,84,431/- i.e. Rs.9688/- but the opposite parties have forcefully got deposited a sum of Rs.22,355/- from her and in this way they have charged a sum of Rs.12,667/- in excess from her. The complainant has further alleged that the then DTO Sh.Bhupinder Singh has got published a news item in the newspaper 'Dainik Bhaskar' dated 10.11.2011 that no registration fee is payable on the VAT charges. The complainant requested the opposite parties to refund the excess amount received from her but to no avail. Hence the complainant has filed the present complaint to seek the directions to the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.12,667/- alongwith interest, cost and compensation.

2. Notice was sent to the opposite parties. The opposite parties after appearing before this Forum have filed their joint written statement and pleaded on the legal side that this Forum has no jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint as under the provisions of the special Statute, there are special provisions of claiming the refund of the excess amount if paid inadvertently and on denial the claimant has the legal right to file an appeal against the impugned authority under the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act before the Competent Authority i.e. S.T.C Pb.Chandigarh but the complainant has directly approached this Forum without following the proper remedy available to her. As such this complaint deserves dismissal on this sole ground. The opposite parties further pleaded that the amount of the registration fee has been deposited by the complainant bonafidely under the mistake of calculation which has been credited under the Head 0041-Motor Vehicle Act and the account is managed and controlled by the Government of Punjab. However, it may take a considerable time of atleast six to eight weeks for managing and sanctioning the refund after following the procedure as per the financial rules enacted under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act. The refund of the excess amount shall be paid as and when the funds are received from the Treasury Office, Bathinda. In para No.9 on facts of their written statement the opposite parties specifically pleaded that the complainant herself never met them nor any representation has been received in their office.

3. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

4. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.

5. The submissions of the complainant are that she has purchased Ford Figo 1.5 Diesel Titanium Car for Rs.4,84,431/- on dated 25.1.2011 and paid 12.5% VAT on the price of the said car amounting to Rs.60,554/- and Surcharge on VAT @ 10% amounting to Rs.6055/- and in total she paid the amount of Rs.5,51,040/- to M/S.A.B. Motors Pvt.Ltd, Ludhiana. The complainant had applied for the registration of the said car in her name with the opposite party No.1 and they conveyed her that the amount of Rs.22,355/- is payable for the road tax. The complainant has deposited the amount of Rs.22,355/- vide receipt No.764768 dated 8.3.2011 and she was issued the token No.66561/2011 dated 8.3.2011, the tentative date for the delivery of the registration certificate was given as 25.3.2011 registration No.PB-03X-3772 was issued to her. The complainant submitted that she had paid total amount of Rs.5,51,040/- for the purchase of the said car as such the registration fee is payable @ 4% on the said value which has exceeded Rs.5 lacs. But as per section 3 (4) of Punjab Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1924.

“The tax on the motor car and motorcycle shall be leviable in lump-sum which shall be counted on the actual price of such vehicle (Excluding taxes, if any), the rate determined by the Government from time to time besides exceeding the rate, as has been specified in the schedule”

As no registration fee is payable on the amount of VAT rather the same is payable only on the actual price of the said car i.e. Rs.4,84,431/- i.e. less than Rs.5 lacs and 2% fee is payable for the registration of the said car but the opposite parties have charged Rs.12,667/- in excess from the complainant. The complainant requested the opposite parties to refund the excess amount received from her but till date they have paid no heed to her request.

6. The opposite parties on the legal side submitted that this Forum has no jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint as the complainant has not availed the remedy as provided to her under the Motor Vehicle Act. The complainant has to file an appeal before the Competent Authority i.e. S.T.C Pb.Chandigarh but she has directly approached this Forum.

The remedy under the Consumer Protection Act is the additional remedy and is not in derogation with any other law for the time being in force. As per section 3 of the 'Act' the complainant can avail additional and alternative remedy provided under the 'Act'.

“Section 3:- Act not in derogation of any other law-The provisions of this Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force.”

The other objection taken by the opposite parties is that the amount has been credited under the Government Head 0041-Motor Vehicle Act and this account is managed and controlled by the Government of Punjab and it will take a considerable time of atleast six to eight weeks for managing and sanctioning the refund after following the procedure as per the financial rules enacted under the provisions of Motor Vehicle Act.

The opposite parties further submitted that the complainant herself deposited the amount, due to the wrong calculation and the amount has already been credited to the account of Government of Punjab as such he cannot avail the remedy under this 'Act'.

7. A perusal of record shows that the complainant has purchased the said vehicle on 25.1.2011 vide Ex.C4 and the invoice was issued for Rs.5,51,040/- including VAT @ 12.5% i.e. Rs.60,554/- and surcharge on the VAT @ 10% i.e. Rs.6055/- and the actual price of the said vehicle was given Rs.4,84,431/-. The opposite party No.1 has calculated the amount of the road tax which is required for the registration of the said vehicle on the total amount of Rs.5,51,040/- and the complainant had bonafidely deposited the amount of Rs.22,355/- vide receipt No.764768 dated 8.3.2011. The opposite party No.1 came to know that the more amount has been got deposited by her and she had requested the opposite parties many times to refund the excess amount but till date they have not refunded any amount to her.

In their reply the opposite parties have specifically pleaded that the amount is to be refunded within the Statutory period of 60 days (i.e. 6 to 8 weeks) whereas in the present case the time of 60 days has already been lapsed as the complainant has deposited the amount of Rs.22,355/- on dated 8.3.2011. Moreover as per Gazette Notification of Punjab Government under Motor Vehicle Act, 1924 amended upto date under section 3(4):-

“(4) The tax on motor car and motorcycle shall be leviable in lump sum, which shall be counted on the actual price of such vehicle (excluding taxes, if any) at such rate, as may be determined by the Government from time to time, but not exceeding the rate, as has been specified in the Schedule.”

In the above notification it has been specifically mentioned that the amount be calculated including tax, if any.

8. As per Punjab Government Gazette, Extraordinary, published by Authority, Chandigarh Friday, January 18, 2008 (PAUSA 28, 1929 SAKA). According to this notification, Clause-4 Sub Clause 3 (4), “The tax on motor car and motor cycle shall be leviable in lump-sum which shall be counted on the actual price of such vehicle (Excluding taxes, if any) as such rate, as may be determined by the Government from time to time besides exceeding the rate, as has been specified in the Schedule”

According to the notification, the opposite parties were required to get deposited the fee from the complainant mentioned in the slab i.e. below to Rs..5 lacs as the price of the said car was Rs.4,84,431/-.

8. Thus in view of what has been discussed above the opposite parties have to charge the fee of registration on the actual price of the vehicle, whereas they have charged the fee on the price including taxes etc, the slap under which the fee was to be paid changed and she has to pay more fee, whereas her vehicle was covered under the slab of below Rs.5 lacs, she was liable to pay only 2% fee of the actual price of the vehicle in question. The opposite parties got deposited Rs.22,355/- vide receipt No.764768 dated 8.3.2011. In this way the opposite parties have got deposited Rs.12,667/- more from the complainant.

9. Therefore in view of what has been discussed above this Forum concludes that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties as they have violated their own notifications issued from time to time and got deposited Rs.12,667/- excess from the complainant. Hence this complaint is accepted with Rs.3000/- as cost and compensation and the opposite parties are directed to refund the amount of Rs.12,667/- which was got deposited by the opposite parties in excess from the complainant. The compliance of this order be done jointly and severally by the opposite parties within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

In case of non-compliance the interest @ 9% per annum will yield on the amount of Rs.12,667/- since the institution of this complaint i.e. 10.9.2012 till realization.

8. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced in open Forum:-

07-12-2012

Vikramjit Kaur Soni

President

Amarjeet Paul

Member

Sukhwinder Kaur

Member