BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

C.C NO-75/2017

Present-Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Smt. Smita Tripathy, Member (W).

Niranjan Bagh,

S/O-Benudhar Bagh,

R/O-At-Mahabirpada,Dhanupali,

P.O/P.S-Dhanupali,Dist-Sambalpur.                                                …..Complainant

Vrs.

1. The Manager,

M/S- Hero Fin Corp Ltd.,

9, Community Centre, Basant Lok,Vasant Vihar,

New Delhi-110057(India).

2. The Finance Manager,

M/S- Hero Fin Corp Ltd.

3. Rojesh Sahu,S/O- Prafulla Sahu,

R/O- Reserve Police Line, Qtr No-F/10,

Sambalpur Town,P.O-Sambalpur,

P.S-Town, Dist-Sambalpur.….O.Ps.

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant:-                      Sri P.R.Badapanda, Advocate & Associates.
2. For the O.P-1             :-                      None.
3. For the O.P-2             :-                      None.
4. For the O.P-3             :-                      None.

DATE OF HEARING : 08.03.2021, DATE OF ORDER : 12.04.2021

SRI DIPAK KUMAR MAHAPATRA,PRESIDENT:-            Brief facts of the case is that the Complainant opted to purchase a Maestro vehicle after he came to know from the advertisement  to get subsidy on purchase of Hero motorcycles on the occasion of Dushera Festival. He reached at the Authorised Dealer of Hero motorcycles and scooters at M/S Shyam Automobiles, met the O.P-3 who was the Agent of the O.P-1 & 2 who arranged finance for purchase of the Maestro Scooter on instalments for zero down payments.  The Complainant believed the words of the O.P-3 and paid Rs.27,660/- in cash in the showroom premises of M/S Shyam Automobiles along with extra payment of Rs.3,000/- towards accessories and granted money receipts  acknowledging receipt of Rs.27,660/- on behalf of the O.P-1 & 2  vide M.R No-402876 dtd. 10.08.2015.  On dtd.24.08.2015 the O.P-3 arranged a Maestro Scooter from the Rengali Showroom of the M/S Shyam Automobiles after 10 days as there was no stock in Sambalpur Showroom. The Complainant has issued three blank cheques and voter ID Card enabling the O.Ps to deduct the EMIs. The EMI were fixed at Rs.2500/- per months for 12 months. The first EMI was deducted for an amount of Rs.2,080/- on dtd 08.01.2016. The Complainant brought the matter to the notice of the O.P-3 who replied that it might have been deducted towards insurance premium. The Complainant has availed an account statement from the financier and came to know that the EMI was fixed at Rs. 1,813/- instead of Rs.2,500/-. Again the cheque presented towards EMI was bounced on dtd.10.08.2016. Further it is seen that 21 EMIs were deducted @Rs.1,813 for total of Rs.38,073/- from the Bank account  up to July- 2017 and other seven EMIs were deducted @ Rs. 2,080/-  for a total of Rs14,560/- up to July-2017. On asking the O.P-3 could not clarify the Complainant rather suggested to make contact with the Hero Finance but the finance company also denied having such account of deduction of Rs.2,080/- per month but later on it was confirmed from SBI Rairakhol branch that the deduction of Rs.2,080/- per month for seven EMIs were deducted  and credited to the account of Hero Fincorp. The total price of the Maestro Scooter was Rs. 57,660/- and the Complainant has paid Rs.27,660/- as down payment in cash, Rs.3,000/- for accessories, 21 EMIS @ 1,813/-per month in a total of Rs. 38,073/-, in this way he has paid Rs. 68,733/-. In addition to this Rs.14,560/- was debited from the account of the Complainant towards seven EMIs @ Rs.2,080/- to the Hero Fincorp. From the above calculation it is ascertained that the O.Ps have taken Rs.25,633 in excess from the Complainant. The O.Ps have realised an excess amount from the Complainant without the knowledge and consent for he sustained irreparable loss. But the O.Ps are still continuing deducting money from the accounts of the Complainant though the Complainant has paid the entire price of the Vehicle. Hence the Complainant submits that the O.Ps has committed deficiency in service and they shall be penalised and relief may be granted to him as per the prayed.

The case was admitted and notice was issued from this Commission but they were returned unserved to this Office with a remark “Addressee Not Found”. But on verification it is ascertain from the website of the O.P-1 &2,it found that the address was not changed.  So the Complainant presumes that the O.P-1&2 are knowingly and deliberately avoided to receive the notices issued by this Commission to get escape from their liabilities and Court proceedings. The O.P-3 is the agent of the O.P-2 and still continuing working for the O.P-2 at the time of filling of this case but follows the way of the other O.Ps are avoided service of notices.

POINTS OF DETERMINATION:-

1. whether the Complainant is comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act,2019?
2. whether the O.Ps has committed any Unfair Trade Practice to the Complainant?

From the above discussion and materials available on records we inferred that the Complainant comes under the purview of Consumer of the O.Ps as he has purchased a Maestro Scooter on instalments through finance from the O.P-1& 2. The O.P-2 has monopolistically and arbitrarily deducted EMI from the account of the Complainant which was not as per the agreement as the EMI was fixed at Rs. 1,813/- but the amount deducted for Rs.2,080/-. There is an excess of Rs. 25,633 was collected against the loan which is amounts to unfair trade practice where there is no question of late payment, arrears, cheques bounce charges, etc arises.   Moreover O.Ps are still continuing deducting money from the accounts of the Complainant though the Complainant has paid the entire price of the Vehicle.So we inferred that the O.Ps has committed deficiency in service as well as unfair Trade Practice to the Complainant. Hence we order as under:-

ORDER

The complaint is allowed. The O.P-1,2 & 3 are jointly and severally directed to return the excess amount of Rs.25,633/- received from the Complainant towards the loan  with 9% interest from the date of filing of the case till the final payment is made to the Complainant. The O.P-1,2 & 3 are jointly and severally are also directed to pay Rs.60,000/-(Rs.20,000/-each)as Compensation towards the harassment, mental pain and agony caused to the Complainant and Rs.10,000/-as cost of the litigation. The compliance of the order is to be made within a month.

Office is directed to supply the free copies of the order to the parties receiving acknowledgement of the delivery of thereof.

Order pronounced in the open court today i.e. 12^th day of April, 2021 under my hand and seal of this Commission.

I      agree,                                        

            -Sd/-                                                                                                   -Sd/-

          MEMBER(W).                                                                                     PRESIDENT.

Dictated and Corrected

  by me.

-Sd/-

          PRESIDENT.