PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

                             CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 03/2020

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,

Sri. Amulya Kumar Acharya,

S/O- Sri. Sukdev Acharya,

R/O- L.I.G.II ½ Housing Board Colony, Modipada,

PO/PS/Dist-Sambalpur,

At Present R/O-Hanuman Nagar, Near Durga Mandap,

Dhanupali, PO-Dhanupali,

Dist- Sambalpur, Odisha.                                              ...………..Complainant

                                                Versus

1. The Branch Manager, HDB Financial Services Ltd.

At-2^nd Floor, Plot No. 1203/1782, Ward No. 12, Quality Mansion, Nayapara, Gole Bazar, Sambalpur, Dist-Sambalpur-768001, Odisha.

2. The Manager, HDB Financial Services Ltd.

Ground Floor, Zenith House, Keshavrao Khadye Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400034, Maharastra.

3. The Manager, HDB Financial Services Ltd.

Radhika, 2^nd Floor, Law Garden Road, Navrangpura,

Ahmedabad-380009, Gujrat.

4. Sanjeeb Kumar Dash,

Proprietor of Dash Mobile,

At-Mahabir Pada Chowk, Dhanupali, Po-Dhanupali,

Dist-Sambalpur-768005, Odisha.                        …………...Opp.Parties

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant                   :-         Sri. S.Dash, Advocate & Associates
2. For the O.P.No.1 to 3                   :-         Sri. A.K.Sahoo, Advocate & Associates
3. For the O.P. No.4                                    :-         Ex-parte

Date of Filing:03.01.2020,Date of Hearing :20.09.2022, Date of Judgement : 15.11.2022

  Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT

1. The Complainant filed the complaint against HDB Financial Service Ltd. O.P. No.3 the registered Office, O.P. No.2 the corporate office and O.P. No.1 Branch Office in Sambalpur which is a leading non-Banking Financial Company for deficiency in service. The O.P. No.4 is the retailer proforma O.P. On 11.09.2018 the complaint purchased M1 A2 Black Mobile phone having IMEI No. 868130033187598 from O.P. No.4 financed by O.P. No.1 for Rs. 17,490/- and finance amount is Rs. 19,339/- with EMI of Rs. 2494/- for 8 installments. The mobile  was insured and extra charge was received by O.P. No.1. No any document of insurance has been provided by the O.P. No.1. The amount has been deducted from the a/c of the complainant.

On 20.10.2018 the mobile phone was stolen from his residence, the Complainant lodged F.I.R. in Dhanupali P.S. but could not recover. The Complainant claimed before O.P. No.1 during insurance coverage period but O.P. No.1 rejected the claim and remained silent. Several request made to O.P. No.1but they shown their rude behavior and compelled to deposit the rest EMI.

On 29.03.2019 a pleader notice was sent to O.P. No.2 and then on 17.04.2019 to O.P. No.1 but it was in vain. The O.Ps are deficient in their service. Being aggrieved the complaint was filed.

2. The O.P. No.1 to 3 in their version submitted that the Complainant approached the O.Ps for finance of a Digital product loan, Rs. 19.339/- sanctioned, loan agreement No. 5260775 was executed by Complainant and the Complainant purchased the mobile set. The mobile set was insured for screen protection on payment of Rs. 1349/-. The mobile was stolen from the Complainant which does not come under the insurance policy. The claim has been rightly rejected. There is no any deficiency on the part of the O.Ps.
3. Perused the documents filed by the Complainant. On 11.09.2018 vide receipt No. 177 M/s Dash Mobile sold the M1 A2 Black mobile set for Rs. 17,490/-. The Complainant entered into agreement with O.Ps through Aadhar Card No. 2018 0101-5511 and after payment of Rs. 500/- acknowledged on 16.09.2018. On 20.10.2018 the mobile set was stolen but FIR was lodged in Dhanupali Ps on 13.12.2018. The loan closure letter dated 27.08.2019 has been filed along with A/C statement in loan account No. 5260775. On 17.04.2019 pleader notice was sent to the O.Ps.

The O.P.s filed the sales finance application form No. SF 49998000122 dated 11.09.2018 and loan agreement form, promissory note, the certificate of protection covering period from 11.09.2018 to 10.09.2019.

4. The Complainant paid Rs. 1849/- on 25.09.2018 to the O.Ps to-wards mobile protection service which reveals from the account statement. The certificate of protection issued by the O.Ps for IMEI No. 868130033187598 covers from 11.09.2018 to 10.09.2018. The insurance covers only when the device stops working. The Complainant has to request to No. 1800220506 informing the purchased invoice with IMEI then the O.P.s send expert for repair service. The protection does not cover to any theft of the product as shown by the Complainant in FIR dated 13.12.2018. In the other hand closure of the loan document dated 27.08.2019 shows the contract between the complainant and O.Ps is cover on 27.08.2019.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case we do not find any deficiency on the part of the O.Ps. Accordingly, it is ordered:

The complaint is dismissed on contest against O.P. No.1 to 3 and ex-parte against O.P. No.4 The parties are to bear their own cost.

                   Order pronounced in open court on this 15^th Nov. 2022.

                   Supply free copies to the parties.