Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – s.21 – Appellant booked a new car, paid the entire sale consideration – Respondent no.1-dealer delivered a used car which was used as “Demo-Test Drive Vehicle” – National Commission setting aside the concurrent findings recorded by the District Forum and State Commission, modified the orders and directed compensation of Rs.1 lakh to be paid to the appellant – On appeal, held: Once the new car was booked and full sale consideration was paid, a duty was cast upon the dealer to deliver a new car which is not defective – To deliver the defective car against the new car was not permissible – District Forum as well as the State Commission on appreciation of evidence on record concurrently found that the car delivered was used car – Such findings of facts were not required to be interfered by the National Commission in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction – It acted beyond the scope and ambit of the revisional jurisdiction conferred u/s.21(b) – Further, even as per the findings recorded by National Commission, the car which was delivered was a defective car and therefore even itself directed that the compensation of Rs.1 lakh be paid to the complainant for the delivery of the defective car – Not to deliver the new car despite the full sale consideration paid and/or to deliver the defective car is unfair trade practice – District Forum and the State Commission justified in directing the respondent no.1 to replace the delivered car and to deliver a new car – Impugned order set aside – Order passed by the District Forum confirmed by the State Commission restored – Costs of Rs.1 lakh to be paid by respondent no.1.
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – s.21 – Revisional jurisdiction – Powers of National Commission – Exercise of – Held: Powers of the National Commission are very limited – Only in a case where it is found that the State Commission has exercised its jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or has failed to exercise the jurisdiction so vested illegally or with material irregularity, the National Commission would be justified in exercising the revisional jurisdiction – In exercising of revisional jurisdiction the National Commission has no jurisdiction to interfere with the concurrent findings recorded by the District Forum and the State Commission which are on appreciation of evidence on record.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.