Orissa

Kendujhar

CC/9/2017

Mr. Suresh Chandra Jena - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. Branch Manager, Indian Overseas Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Sri S.S. Panda

23 Dec 2022

ORDER

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KEONJHAR

                                    CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO 9 of 2017

 

    Mr. Suresh Chandra Jena, aged about 47 years,

     S/o: Dasarathi Jena,

     At: Jagannathpur,

     P.O: Kendujhargarh, P.S:Town,

     Dist.: Keonjhar- 758001……..…………………………………….Complainant

                      Vrs.

1. Branch Manager,

    Indian Overseas Bank,

    (Govt. of India undertaking)

    At: Thana square,

    P.O: Kendujhargarh,

    P.S:Town, Dist.: Keonjhar

2. Regional Manager/ Concerned authority

    Indian Overseas Bank,

    (Govt. of India undertaking)

    B/2 (West), Sahid Nagar,

    Bhubaneswar-751007……….……………………………………..Op. Parties

Sri B.N.Patra,President

Sri. J.K.Behera,Member I/C

Advocate for complainant- S.S Panda

Advocate for O.Ps  1 - C.Hota,S.K Panda

Op-2- Set-exparte

 

Date of  filing- 21.02.2017                                                                      Date of order- 23.12.2022

 Sri B.N Patra (President)

Brief facts of the case is that the complainant has purchased one Mahindra tractor bearing  Regd No-OR-09-B-0711 duly financed by Opp parties. The complainant financed Rs 500,000/-from Opp Parties to use the said tractor with trolley for commercial purpose to  earn his livelihood. The allegation of complainant was the Ops are not supplying agreement paper, instalment report, rate of interest and for release of vehicle. On the other hand, Op-1  sent a notice to complainant to clear up Rs 4,91,128/- and  undebited interest  of Rs 4486/-.Again on 4.1.2017 Op-1 sent a letter to complainant to clear up  Rs 2,75,741/- and on 06.01.2017 again received letter demanding Rs2,69,741/-towards  outstanding dues with  interest. So this acts of Ops are contradictory,  in correct,  fabricated, defect and unjustified, And on 7.1.2017,Op-1 forcibly  repossessed the tractor with trolley and published advertisement on daily odia news paper “The Pragatibadi” on 31^st January 2017 to sell the vehicle. for which the complainant filed this complain case with prayer to  release the vehicle ,to recalculate the outstanding dues and provide copies of agreement and not to sell the vehicle and compensation for mental agony and litigation charges.

Under above complaint, the case is admitted. Notice issued to Ops and an interim order was passed not to sell the vehicle until further order. Due to long absence of both the parties, for hearing, the case is taken up to decide on merits.

Complainant relied on the following documents.

1. Xerox copy of R.C. Book of regd No OD-09-B-0711

2. Xerox copy  of trolly  R.C Book-OD-09-B-0712

3. Letter of 10B order-1004/1516

4. Letter  dtd-4.1.2017

5. Seizure list

6. Advertisement of daily news paper

On the other hand Op-1 is appeared and filed written version and show cause of misc case.

Op-2 did not appear and disobey the notice of this Commission for which Op-2 was set exparte.

Op-1 on his written version strongly denied the averments and stated that the case is not maintainable and there is no cause of action arose to initiate this consumer complain case. It is a term loan under CGTMSE (credit guarantee) fund trust for micro and small enterprises) for commercial purpose. So he is not entitled to claim anything under consumer forum. The complainant is very much aware about the loan agreement, monthly instalment and rate of interest. Due to non payment of loan amount it became NPA (Non performing asset) it is false to say that the complainant was ready to pay Rs 70,000/- for release of vehicle and will pay other amount on instalment basis. To auction said tractor, one advertisement was made on daily odia newspaper THE PRAGATI BADI. The outstanding dues was in total Rs 5,21,261.52/-. The complainant is intentionally defaulting to pay the instalment. So the prayer made by the complainant is  not sustainable in the eyes of Law. And it deserves no merit.

Op -1 relied on the following documents to prove his case.

1. Loan application form.

2. Credit sanction letter.

3. Letter of hypothecation.

4. Statement of account. Dated 12.06.2017

5. Statement of account dtd 19.03.2017

6. Correspondence from Bank and Advocate.

On the above situation it is necessary to attend the following issues before passing any order.

1. Whether the complainant is a consumer?

2. Whether the case is maintainable?

3. Whether any cause of action arises to file the case.

4. Whether the Ops have made deficiency of service to complainant?

5. What relief the complainant is entitled to get or not ?

In the above circumstances all the issues are discussed jointly.

Perused the case record. It reveals from complain petition that the complainant has purchased a tractor  having regd No –OR-09-B-0711 and trolley No-OD-093-0112 having engine No RE NB02595 chassis No-RFNB02595 The complainant financed Rs 5,00,000/- from Ops for commercial purpose to earn his livelihood. So Complainant is a consumer. Opp Party issued notice to complainant on 03.01.2017  to clear the outstanding dues of Rs 4,91,128/- along with Rs 4486/-  undebited interest. On 4.1.17,Op-1 sent a another notice to clear up Rs 2,75,741/- outstanding dues. On 6.1.2017 further issued notice demanding Rs 2,69,741/-. As per the above notice the letters containing different figures are fabricated,   incorrect and unjustified. On 7.1.2017 Op-1  seized tractor with trolley and kept in stockyard. It reveals from the case record that Ops have also made advertisement on daily odia news paper “The Pragatibadi” to sell /auction the vehicle. Such work of Ops are arbitral in nature. When the vehicle was seized cause of action arose on 7.1.2017.So far as the written version filed by Op-1 it shows that the tractor was for commercial purpose under CGTMSE Scheme. The complainant has taken false plea to avoid the monthly instalment. Due to non-payment of loan amount it became NPA(Non performing Asset).There is no discrepancy  in the letter dtd 4.1.2017. As outstanding dues is 2,75,741.94/- leaving apart Rs 2,51,503.06  on CGTMSE Scheme. Due to Deposit of Rs 6000/- by complainant outstanding amount remains Rs 2.69,741 .94/-.So there is no discrepancy from Op-1. Repossessing on by Op-1 is legal. Total outstanding dues is Rs 5,21,261.52.interest is not calculated over CGTMSE scheme on RS 2.51,503.06 since 31.05.2016.So Op  prays they have not made any violation, irregularities, in adapting the procedure. Op prays to dismiss the petition with cost against the complainant. It also found from the case record that Op-1 has filed petition to vacate the interim order passed by the Hon’ble Commission for ends of justice.

FINDINGS

From the above complaint petition and written version it is clear that the complainant has failed to pay the outstanding dues. The complainant has not produced any present status of loan of vehicle. So it is clear that he has no interest to give evidence or necessary arguments for his benefits. Under the above situation it is necessary to pass order on merits relying on petition, written version, and documents filed by both the parties. It is found from the interim application that the complainant has prayed to release the vehicle and order is also passed to release the vehicle directing the Ops not to sell or auction the vehicle till further order, after release of vehicle the complainant has not submitted upto date a/c statement. So it is clear that complainant is not paying regular instalments, in this situation it is found that ops have not made any deficiency of service to the complainant.  Under the above situation the complainant is not entitled to get any relief.

 

The petition filed by the complainant being devoid of merits is dismissed. The interim order passed earlier is vacated .There is no compensation for mental harassment and litigation expenses.

The order pronounced in open Commission today i.e on  23^rd   December 2022.

Free copy be supplied to parties, if applied for.

 

Pronounced on 23^rd   December.2022

 

                                                                                                                                          I    agree 

                                                                  

 ( Sri J. K. Behera)                                                                                            ( B.N Patra )

   MembeI/C                                                                                                     (President)

DCDRC,Keonjhar                                                                                          DCDRC,Keonjhar

 

                    

 

                                                             Dictated & Corrected by

 

                                                                     ( Sri B. N. Patra)                                                                                                             President DCDRC,Keonjhar