9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 1140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant's bid for a sum of ₹ 70,000/- being the highest, was knocked down in his favour and accepted by respondent No. 1. 4.As per the terms and conditions of the auction, appellant deposited a sum of ₹ 20,000/-, as soon as the bid was knocked down in his favour. Since no objection was received against the said auction sale, the appellant deposited balance amount of ₹ 50,000/- on 20.8.1999. 5.On 19.9.1999, the said auction was confirmed, since no objections were received much less, from the previous owner Iqbal. Thus, it was treated to be a final sale in favour of the appellant. 6.Obviously, after the sale having been confirmed in favour of the appellant, he was entitled to receive possession of the truck, which was not delivered to him by the respondents. Thus he made a representation on 30.11.1999 for delivery thereof. He continued to make several representations with the respondents for delivery of the truck purchased in the auction and also to hand over to him the documents so that the vehicle could be transferred in the name of the appellant so as to enable him to ply the same. It appears that truck was delivered to the appellant after about six ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... New Delhi. The same came to be disposed of vide impugned order on 18.5.2005 and the complaint filed by appellant has partly been allowed with the following directions: In view of the long delay, we are inclined to grant damages to the extent of ₹ 25,000/- along with cost of ₹ 5000/- payable by the respondents to the Petitioner jointly and severally. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the District Magistrate, Sultanpur, U.P. to conduct an inquiry into the matter and fix the responsibility including the recovery of this awarded amount from the officers who are found guilty of deficiency/negligence in this case. 14. Feeling aggrieved thereby the auction purchaser Madan Kumar Singh (since dead) preferred a Special Leave Petition whereas respondents have also preferred Special Leave Petition against Madan Kumar Singh (since dead). 15. The original appellant having died during the pendency of the appeal, his legal representative was brought on record. 16. We have, accordingly, heard the learned counsel for the appellant Mr. R.K. Kapoor and learned counsel for the respondents Mr. R.K. Gupta at length. Perused the record. 17. The ques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lude a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose; or (ii) [hires or avails of] any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person [hires or avails of] the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person. [Explanation- For the purposes of sub- clause (i), commercial purpose does not include use by a consumer of goods bought and used by him exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood, by means of self- employment;] . 23. Plain reading of the same makes it abundantly clear that appellant herein would fall in the category of a 'consumer' as he had bought the truck for a consideration which was paid by him. It was bought to be used exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood by means of self- employment. The said pleading by way of amendment was incorporated by the appellant in his application filed under Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, board or lodging or both, [housing construction], entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal service. 28. The facts mentioned hereinabove would go to show that appellant having been declared as highest bidder had deposited the initial money and next day deposited the balance of the consideration. The truck in question was actually handed over to him almost after six months from the date of auction in his favour. Even after getting delivery of the truck he could not have started plying the same unless he was delivered the relevant papers thereof. There is no dispute, which even otherwise stands proved from the voluminous material available on record that despite best efforts made by the appellant, the relevant papers of the truck were handed over to him only after six years from the date of the auction. No plausible or convincing reasons have been assigned by the respondents for not doing so. 29. From the narration of the aforesaid facts, it is clearly made out t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est bid of the appellant was knocked down in his favour, pursuant thereto, he had deposited the requisite amounts, then as a necessary consequence thereof he should have been delivered the truck immediately along with the necessary documents. For the reasons best known to the respondents they had not only delayed delivery of the truck but had also, despite the efforts made by the appellant, not handed over the papers of the truck to him for long number of years. Any explanation offered during the course of the arguments is not acceptable to us, which certainly shows their malafide intentions. 35. Even assuming for a moment that bank had not delivered the papers of the truck to the respondents then it was the duty of the respondents to have insisted the bank for delivery of the papers which they had failed to do. Thus, in any case, there cannot be any escape of the respondents from shaking off the liability fastened on them by the National Commission. 36. Taking the totality of the situation as it exists, we are of the opinion that a total amount of ₹ 1,00,000/- payable by respondents jointly or severally to the appellant would subserve the justice. 37. Even though th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
