West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/45/2013

Sri Bibhas Khan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Authorised officer, Magma FinCrop Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

06 Sep 2013

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

 

 Complaint case No.45/2013                                                         Date of disposal: 06/09/2013                               

 BEFORE : THE HON’BLE PRESIDENT :  Mr. Sujit Kumar Das.

                                                      MEMBER :  Mrs. Debi Sengupta.

                                                      MEMBER :  Mr. Kapot Chattopadhyay.

    For the Complainant/Petitioner/Plaintiff : Mr. A. K. Dutta. Advocate.

    For the Defendant/O.P.S.                           : Mr. D. Ghosh. Advocate.

          

Sri Bibhas Khan S/o-late Gokul Khan, Vill-Sekenderpur, P.O.-Radhanagar, P.S.-Ghatal, Dist-Paschim Medinipur… …………Complainant.

                                                              Vs.

1. Authorised officer, Magma FinCrop Ltd., Kharagpur Branch Office at Inda,  P.O. & P.S.-Kharagpur,  Dist-Paschim Medinipur
2. Magma FinCrop Ltd., Magma House, 24, Park Street, Kolkata-700016 ………Ops.

         This is the case of the complainant that by virtue of an agreement being its No.HO/G/0067/09/000106. The complainant took loan and purchased a vehicle being its Registration No. WB-11A 8680.  During the agreement and continuously payment of installment, the vehicle was damaged in an accident and thereby he failed to make payment of regular installment.  According to agreement the payment of installment was paid and on 13/02/2013 Op supplied balance sheet in favour of the complainant disclosing that there was over due of 136 days and on that account a sum of Rs.37,113.79/- (Thirty seven thousand one hundred thirteen & seventy nine paisa) only payable by the complainant.  It is alleged by the complainant that since the installments were paid according to agreement there should not be any over due charge and the matter was reported to the Op.  In spite of the Op illegally was trying to take possession of the vehicle.  Sating the case the complainant prays for passing necessary direction so that Op shall not take possession of the vehicle and to reject the over due charge on delivery of the balance sheet in favour of the complainant.

      Op/Insurance Company contested the case by filing W/O claiming that the allegations raised in the complaint are all false and manufacture.  Rather there was arbitration proceeding and

Contd………………..P/2

 

 

- ( 2 ) -

accordingly an aware was granted on 28/03/2013 in terms of the agreement.  In view of the matter this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint case.

                     Upon careful scrutiny of the entire case it appears that in terms of the agreement the dispute has already been settled by virtue of award duly signed by Ld. Debasis Mallick.

      In the contest above it is already pointed out that such complain cannot be decided by the Forum after granting arbitration award.  In this regard a decision reported in 2006(3)CPR 339 (NC) has been discussed by the Ld. Advocate for the Ops.

      In view of the discussed made herein above it is held and decided  this Forum is no jurisdiction to go into the matter since the dispute has already been settled by arbitration award.

                 Hence, it is,

                                    Ordered,

                                                    that the case be dismissed on contest  without  cost.

Dic. & Corrected by me

              

         President                       Member                         Member                               President

                                                                                                                              District Forum

                                                                                                                          Paschim Medinipur.