Judgment:
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT
The appellant is the opposite party /dealer in CC.15/06 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur. The appellant is under orders to deliver a Minidor three wheeler goods vehicle to the complainant for a sum of Rs.25,000/- and also to pay cost of Rs.1000/-.
2. It is the case of the complainant that she saw an advertisement in Malayala Manorama newspaper dated 10.10.05 offering the Minidor three wheeler goods vehicle for sale at a price of Rs.25,000/-with other fringe benefits of free insurance and special gift, altogether amounting to Rs.6000/- She sent a letter accepting the said offer but received no reply. She has sought for sale of the vehicle at the price offered in the advertisement. The first opposite party/dealer has filed a version denying that it has any role in the advertisement, which was published by the second opposite party/manufacturers. Further more the advertisement was only a conditional offer that on the initial payment is Rs.25,000/- and the balance amount is to be paid in instalments. The complainant has also not remitted the initial payment of Rs.25,000/.
3. The evidence adduced consisted of Exts.P1 to P3 the newspaper containing the advertisement, copy of the letter sent by the complainant and the postal acknowledgment.
4. It is contended by the counsel for the appellant that the complainant cannot be treated as a consumer as she has not paid any amount towards the value of the vehicle. We find that there is merit in the contention of the counsel for the appellant. Except sending a letter that she is ready to accept the offer she has not paid any amount. She is also no case that she incurred any expenses or trouble in pursuing the above advertisement. It can be contended that the advertisement was misleading. We find that the order of the Forum directing to sell the vehicle only for the initial payment cannot be upheld and the order of the Forum is set aside and the appeal is allowed.