Hon’ble Mr. Ajeya Matilal, Presiding Member

Ld. Counsel appearing for the Appellant is present.

Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 is also present.

Today is fixed for final hearing of the appeal. 

The appeal is taken up for hearing. 

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment dated 30.11.2021 in RBT/CC/332/2020 passed by the Additional Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajarhat, New Town allowing the complaint case with a direction upon the OPs to refund of Rs. 15,910/- to the Complainant within 45 days from the date of passing this judgment, in default the amount shall carry interest @12% p.a., the Appellant/Complainant preferred this appeal.

Our attention was drawn to page no. 18 of the memo of appeal wherefrom it appears that the offer price of Microwave Oven was Rs. 15,910/-. The same was paid which would reveal from page 20 of the memo of appeal.

It is submitted that as per terms and conditions as mentioned in page no. 19 of the appeal that delivery of appliance shall be taken by the customer within five days from the date of booking of the appliance. Any delivery later than five days shall attract the Company Price prevailing at that time. Our attention to Para no. 10 of the same document wherefrom it appears that Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. shall intimate the customer regarding any non-availability of stock within 15 days of booking the order. Under such circumstances, the Company shall refund the advance money within 30 days of such intimation.

It was submitted in the written version the aforesaid model was not available at the relevant point of time.

The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Respondent intimated to the Appellant over telephone that the Complainant did not act accordingly.

Subsequently, the cheque was transmitted to the Complainant through post which was refused according to OP. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the amount was advanced on 04.09.2016 and till date the aforesaid amount is lying with the OP. So, he prayed for compensation in the form of interest.

It is also submitted that the Ld. Commission below is directed to refund of the principal amount. The Appellant is not satisfied with that and he prayed for interest, compensation and litigation cost. In support of his contention Ld. Counsel for the Appellant preferred a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in (2009) 8 SCC 307 in Civil Appeal No. 4487 of 2004 wherein it is observed in the aforesaid judgment that the award of compensation must depend on facts and circumstances of each case and has to be worked out after determining the amount of loss suffered by the Consumer. In the case of Secretary, Irrigation Deptt., Govt. of Orissa v. G.C. Roy, (1992) 1 SCC 508, this Court has stated that “a person deprived of the use of money to which he is legitimately entitled has a right to be compensated for the deprivation, call it by any name. It may be called interest, compensation or damages.”

In reply, the Ld. Counsel for the Respondent submitted that after the delay of one and a half year the Appellant filed the complaint. Subsequently, they requested several times for refund the principal amount.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and compensation of law cited above we are of the view the Respondent/OP should be directed to refund the amount with an interest of 9% p.a. from 09.09.2016 within 45 days from this order and a litigation cost of Rs. 1,500/- payable to the Appellant failing which the Appellant/Complainant has the liberty to put the award into execution.

In view of the above direction the impugned judgment is modified.

Order of Stay, if there is any, in connection with this appeal stands vacated.

Let a copy of this judgment be handed over to the parties free of costs.

Appeal being no. 127/2021 stands disposed of.

Note accordingly.