1. By filing this claim under section 25 of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005 (hereinafter to be called the Act), Mr. Nisar Ahmad Ch. has maintained that he had hired services of defendant and got booked two vehicles (Suzuki Mehran) and in this regard he had paid Rs. 1164000/- (eleven lacs & sixty four thousand); defendant promised for delivery of vehicles till 20.12.2012; when claimant contacted defendant, there was no response with reference to delivery of cars; legal notice was issued to defendant on 26.12.2012 which was not responded. Prayed was made for return of price of vehicles Rs. 1164000/- (eleven lacs & sixty four thousand) legal expenses Rs.
36000/- (thirty six thousand) and damages Rs. 8800000/- (eighty eight lacs) for mental torture.
2. Defendant in written statement has taken preliminary objection that claimant is not a consumer hence this Court does not have jurisdiction in this matter. On facts it is admitted that claimant got booked vehicles in question. It is also added that with reference to said cars claimant had been receiving from 16.06.2010 to 28.09.2012 different amounts. Dismissal of claim has prayed for.
3. It was 19.02.2013 when defendant requested for ten days period so as to make payment to claimant hence case was adjourned to 02.03.2013. This was the occasion when all owners of defendant's show-room appeared before this Court and on that day following order was passed: - Present: Claimant in person.
Syed Aftab Ahmad Shah advocate for defendant. Mr. Dawood Khalid, Ch. Riaz Parvaiz & Mr. Masood Shahid owners of defendant's company.
Learned counsel for defendant and all defendants state that they have to make payment to claimant and for that there is a reason for delay which is completion of necessary formalities by CDA on sale and purchase of a property belonging to defendant. All they undertake to make payment to clamant positively within a period of one month. Case is adjourned to 06.04.2013. It is clarified that if payment is made by defendant to claimant before next date that shall be only through cross cheque however, if it is made on date fixed, the amount may be in cash or in cheque."
4. On next two dates no progress was made. Today learned counsel for defendant maintains that defendant could not receive payment for the sale of plot due to some objection by CDA and a litigation pending in Civil Court. He, therefore, has requested to decide this claim in view of his objection about maintainability of claim and jurisdiction of this Court.
5. Learned counsel for defendant by referring section 2 (c) (1) of the Act contends that claimant was an investor who had been receiving interest on the amount which he paid and when he entered into this transaction for commercial purpose or for resale of product, he is not a consumer.
In support learned counsel has referred an account statement showing payment of amount time to time to claimant.
6. Admittedly, claimant got booked vehicles on 04.09.2012 and defendant issued receipts in this context. Statement of account shows receipts of payment from 04.03.2010 to 04.09.2012 and dates of receiving of profit till 28.09.2011. It is worth-mentioning that against amount received by defendant wither reference to cars in question there was no profit ever received by claimant hence to this extent it is wrong to say that claimant got booked vehicles for commercial purposes or for resale. When it is so then claimant does fall within the definition of Consumer as provided by the Act.
7. I cannot ignore another admitted fact that till today the amount for booking of cars received by defendant has not been credited in the account of Pak Suzuki Motors so question of unfair practices is also relevant for consideration.
8. Fact remains that defendant through all owners had agreed to return price of product which offer has not been withdrawn till today and for this claimant was also agreed. Therefore, both parties are bound for what they had agreed. Claimant in these circumstances cannot ask for legal expenses particularly when he has filed claim personally and of damages for mental torture.
9. In view of above, this claim is accepted with direction to defendant to return amount of Rs.
11,64000/- (eleven lacs & sixty four thousand) to claimant within fifteen days from today. File shall be consigned to record room after its due completion. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.