J U D G E M E N T

This complaint is filed by the complainant u/S. 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice against the OP as the OP had obtained much amount for renewal of road tax in respect of his vehicle than the prescribed amount gathered from the Kolkata Gazette, Govt. of West Bengal, Law Department.

On 23.02.2015 the complaint was fixed for hearing ex-parte against the Op as the OP in spite of receipt of valid notice to appear before this ld. Forum and contest the complaint by filing written version or orally whatever it may be, the OP chose not appear before this ld. Forum and so this Forum was pleased to fix the matter for argument ex-parte against the OP. We have carefully perused the POC as well as the document filed by the complainant in support of his contention and heard some argument advanced by the complainant himself appearing

1

personally. It is seen by us that the allegation of the complainant is that during renewal of road tax in respect of his second hand vehicle i.e. Maruti 800, the OP charged from the complainant to the tune of Rs. 18,040=00 towards life time tax and the same paid accordingly by the complainant. Further allegation of the complainant is that after making payment of the said amount to the appropriate authority the complainant has discovered from Kolkata Gazette dated 10.8.2012, Govt. of West Bengal, Law Department which has been downloaded from the internet and gathered knowledge that the said authority i.e. OP had obtained much amount than the amount as prescribed in the said Gazette. According to the complainant as the OP had received much amount than the prescribed amount, it is a violation of the Act, which the OP cannot do and such violation and action of the OP can easily be termed as deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Prayer has been made by the complainant for refund of the balance amount to him along with certain other reliefs.

Upon hearing it is clear to us that admittedly the complainant paid the said amount towards life time road tax in respect of his second hand vehicle to the OP and the OP had received the same gladly. Thereafter the complainant wake up from a deep slumber and filed this complaint praying for refund of the excess amount as paid by him and received by the OP illegally and unlawfully. In this respect we are to say if the complainant is inclined to get refund excess amount, if any, then he may approach before the appropriate Civil Court. So as it is not a consumer complaint hence the Consumer Complaint no. 262/2014 is liable to be dismissed. Hence, it is

O r d e r e d

that the complaint filed by the complainant is dismissed ex-parte without any cost.

Let a plain copy of this order be given to each of the parties free of cost.

                      (Asoke Kumar Mandal)        

             Dictated and corrected by me.                                                           President       

                                                                                                                      DCDRF, Burdwan

                     (Silpi Majumder)

                           Member

                     DCDRF, Burdwan

                                                                                (Silpi Majumder)

                                                                                    Member   

                                                                                 DCDRF, Burdwan

2