DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHUBANESWAR:

C.C.No.271/ 2022

Ashis Kumar Sahoo, aged about 38 years,

S/o – Sri Prafulla Kumar Sahoo, At- Andilo, PO- Balianta,

PS- Balianta, Dist – Khordha

….     Complainant

-Vrs.-

1.       Cholamandalam  Investment & Finance Company Ltd.,

(Formerly known as Cholamandalam DBS Finance Ltd.),

Dare House, 2^nd  Floor, No.2,

          NSC Bose Road, Parrys,Chennai-600 001, India through

          Its Managing Director,  

2.       State Head/ Authorized Signatory of Cholamandalam  Investment & Finance Company Ltd., (Formerly known as Cholamandalam DBS Finance Ltd.),

At-  Plot No.559,  Arnapurna Complex, ,  1^st Floor, Lewis Road,

Cuttack Road, Bhubaneswar - 751014, Dist : Khurda.

                                                                            ….     Opp. Parties

For the complainant                Sri K.C.Prusty & Associates (Advocate)

For the O.Ps.                           Sri A.B. Majhi  & Associates (Adv.)

DATE OF FILING                  :         20/09/2022

DATE OF ORDER                 :         02/06/2023

ORDER

K.C.RATH, PRESIDENT

1.       This is an application U/s 35 of the C.P.Act, 2019.

2.       The complainant’s case in brief is that,  he had availed a loan of Rs.14,75,906/- from the OPs  in order to purchase a  truck.  After availing the loan, he purchased the truck bearing registration number OD-02-AE-3591.  For the purpose  of availing  the  loan, the complainant executed a loan agreement with the OPs. It is alleged by the complainant that the copy the agreement was not supplied to him.  Further, when he demanded for statement of account, he was not supplied with the statement of account.   It is further alleged by the complainant that, due to erratic method of calculation adopted by the OPs, the total outstanding shown against him was  Rs.14,75,906/-.  The complainant further alleges that, the OPs adopted unfair trade practice and there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs in providing service to the complainant. Hence this complaint.

3.       On the other hand, the OPs filed written version  stating  therein that,  the complaint is not maintainable either in law or in fact. The OPs admitted that the complainant availed the loan of Rs.14,75,906/- and he had to repay the entire loan amount @ Rs.36,832/- per month. But the complainant was a willful defaulter and he did not repay the monthly installments regularly. There was  outstanding amount of Rs.2,45,571/- against the complainant. When the complainant defaulted in repaying the loan amount, he came to this Commission seeking relief on the ground of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.  But there is no deficiency in service nor is there any unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.  As the complaint bears no merit, it is liable to be dismissed with cost.

4        Perused the materials on record.  Admittedly, the complainant had availed loan of Rs.14,75,906/- from the OPs. He defaulted in repaying the loan. The statement of account shows that, as on 02/11/2022, there was  an outstanding of  Rs.2,45,571/-  against the complainant. So far as the complainant’s allegation to the effect that he was not supplied with  the copy of the agreement is concerned, is not well founded. When the complainant executed the agreement,  he must have gone through the terms & conditions of the agreement. Had it been so that he had not received the copy of the agreement whereby he was prejudiced, he could have come to this Commission  immediately  after availing the loan but he came to the Commission only when the dispute arose. Besides, the allegation of the complainant to the effect that, he  has not received the statement of account is not well founded,  because along with the complaint petition,  he has furnished the statement of account given by the OPs.   Keeping in view the totality of the facts & circumstances of the case,  we do not find any deficiency in service  on the part of the OPs nor is there any unfair trade practice  on the part of the OPs.   As such, the complaint  bears no merit.  Hence it is ordered.

ORDER

The complaint is  hereby  dismissed on contest  against the OPs  being devoid of merit.

The order is pronounced on this day the  2^nd June,  2023  under the seal & signature of the President and Member (W) of the Commission.

                                                                                      (K.C.RATH)

                                                                                       PRESIDENT

 Dictated & corrected by me

               President                                                                                    

I agree                                                                            

(S.Tripathy)                                                                           

Member (W)                                                                             

Transcribed by Smt. M.Kanungo, Sr.Steno