Orissa

Jharsuguda

CC/21/2014

Manashi Das W/O Manoranjan Das - Complainant(s)

Versus

B.M cholamandalam invesment and fin.Ltd Sambalpur - Opp.Party(s)

B.N Dtta

08 Dec 2014

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JHARSUGUDA

                                        

                           CONSUMER  COMPLAINT  CASE NO. 21 OF 2014

 

Manashi Das ( 61 Yrs.),

W/O: Manoranjan Das,

R/O: Bundia Colony, PO: R.Kudopali,

PS- Brajrajnagar, Dist- Jharsuguda, Odisha………………………. Complainant.

     

                                           Versus 

 

Branch Manager,

Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Co. Ltd.,

At/PS: Ainthapali,

Dist: Sambalpur, Odisha.……………....................................................... Opp. Party.

 

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant                          Shri B.N.Dutta, Adv. & Associate.

For the Opp. Party                             Shri A.K. Sahoo, Adv. & Associates.

 

Date of Order: 08.12.2014

 

Present       

                                                                                            1. Shri S.L. Behera, President.

                                                                                           2. Shri S.K. Ojha, Sr. Member.

                                                                                          3. Smt.A. Nanda, Member(W).

 

                                                                                

Shri S. L. Behera, President :- This is a consumer complaint wherein the complainant Smt. Manoshi Das wife of deceased Manoranjan Das has alleged deficiency in service against the financier Cholamondalam Investment & finance Co. Ltd, Ainthapali, Sambalpur who did not issue NOC (hereinafter No Objection Certificate) in respect of loan obtained by her late husband Manoranjan Das towards purchasing of the vehicle in the event of death of the original loanee and the balance payment is to be recovered from the insurance company to whom a sum of Rs.3,500/- only and Rs.1,650/- only were paid for insurance coverage.  Fact in brief case is that a sum of Rs. 14,60,000/- only was granted towards loan by the O.P to the husband of the complainant and the same was agreed to be repaid in 48 EMIs., started from dtd. 01.01.2012 to 01.12.2015.  It is the averment of the complainant that during his life time her husband had been paying the monthly installment to the O.P regularly and after the death of her husband on dt. 18.02.2013 and paying the installment till January,2014.  It is alleged by the complainant that at the time of financing of the vehicle the agent of the O.P / company insured the life of the husband of the complainant and sum of Rs.3,500/- and Rs.1,650/- only were paid towards insurance charge as per loan proposal signed by the loanee.  It was agreed that on the event of death of the insured husband of the complainant the installment and the principal amount would be recovered from the insurance company and NOC will be issue immediately to the legal heir and the successor of the vehicle.  But the complainant’s allegation is that instead of asking the insurance company towards the balance payment of loan after the death of the insured / borrower the O.P Company started asking for repayment of the outstanding loan amount to the complainant and threaten to repossess the financed vehicle in default of the amount and did not issue require NOC in respect to the loan.  Hence this complaint alleging deficiency in service against the OP company praying for a direction to the O.P to issue NOC of the vehicle to the complainant and for payment of compensation. The complainant has also filed her affidavit in support of her case.    

 

            Being notice the O.P company entered it appearance through his advocate who filed written version admitting the factum of disbursement of loan amount of Rs.14,60,000/- only infavour of the late husband of the complainant as per the agreement but denied that the complainant is not having valid insurance papers and registration papers of the vehicle even it is denied that no insurance policy was obtained by the loanee and no premium had been paid by the deceased husband of the complainant.  According to the O.P company the matter in dispute is to be resolved by the sole arbitrator as per the agreement and the complainant is liable to repay the balance outstanding amount towards the vehicle then only the NOC can be issue.  Accordingly the O.P Company sought for dismissal of the complaint.

 

After perusal of the complaint petition, affidavit of the complainant, written version of the O.P along with the documentary evidence on record.  It is not denied that Rs.14,60,000/- only was given as loan to purchase the vehicle to the late husband of the complainant which was to be agreed to be repay in 48 nos. of EMIs. within schedule agreed on by the parties.  In course of the schedule time period while repayment of the loan amount was continuing by the loanee Manoranjan Das till his death, the complainant being the wife and sole successor of the financed vehicle claiming to have paid the installment till Jasnuary,2014. After perusal of the application form duly signed by the borrower late husband of the complainant it can be seen that it is agreed to pay Rs.3,500/- and Rs.1,650/- only towards TALIC amount and PAC amount respectively under insurance detail.  Obviously whatever amount were mentioned in the above application form is on record must have been recovered by the OP company at the time of purchased the vehicle in question.  Apart from this the claim of the complainant thereafter the dues of the loanee, the balance amount should have been recovered from the insurance company and not from her and the O.P company should have issue NOC to her in respect to the loan account is not been refuted categorically and the O.P simply says that due to invalid insurance policy and registration papers the vehicle cannot be road worthy.  Taking into consideration the evidence on record produced by the parties as to our opinion we cannot discard the claim of the complainant, the O.P Company should have issue NOC towards the loan and towards the complainant much earlier after the death of the late husband of the complainant and should have made arrangement to recover the balance outstanding payment from the insurance company with home the life of the insured was insured.  The complainant has categorically pleaded that amount paid her husband i.e. Rs.3,500/- only and Rs.1,650/- only is one time premium to assured the said loan availed by the husband of the complainant.  The same pleading has not been categorically denied by the O.P.  Denial of the O.P regarding insurance of the loan is a formal one.  Further the O.P has not disclosed the purpose for which such amount has been received by the O.P.  The complainant has also filed an affidavit in support of her aforesaid contention and same evidence has not been disputed or denied by the O.P hence the complainant has successfully proved the same.

 

Under the above observation, we allowed the complaint of the complainant, the O.P company is found to be guilty in deficiency in service in respect to the complainant accordingly the O.P Company is  directed to issue NOC( No objection Certificate) to the complainant in respect to the loan account. Further the O.P company is directed to refund the amount as already received inform of EMIs. ,if any, after the death of the husband of the complainant along with pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- ( Rupees thousand only) towards mental agony, harassment including litigation costs, within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which interest @ 6% per annum will be charged on the  awarded amount till its realization.

 

Accordingly the case is disposed of.

 

Order pronounced in the open court today on this the 08^th   day of December 2014, copy of this order shall be communicated to the parties as per Rule.

 

                                                                       I Agree.                               I Agree. 

                                                                                                          

                                                        Sd/-A.Nanda, Member (W)    Sd/- S. K. Ojha, Member     Sd/-  S.L.Behera, President                  

 

                                            Dictated and corrected by me.

 

                                            Sd/- S.L.Behera, President