Order No.  25  dt.  05/07/2017

The case of the complainant in brief is that complainant purchased a personal computer set from  BSW Business Centre having its office at 7, Marcqus Square, Kolkata-700007 on 19.06.2006 with Rs.31,500/- including vat @ of Rs.4% under invoice no. Sale/06-07/237. Complainant purchased the computer system D1-D42AN61(LGPC) by availing loan of Rs.25,000/- from M/s Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd., 1^st Floor, Shantiniketan Building, Camac Street, Kolkata-700 017 through an introducer Mr Niraj Parekh against EMI payment of Rs.1,271/- started on 13.07.2006. But the complainant failed to pay the EMI in schedule time and underwent a settlement agreement with the o.p 2 for payment of the remaining loan by payment of 3 installments @ Rs.3,000/-. According to the settlement, complainant paid the said three installments against which the complainant collected money receipts. But on 17.09.2013 o.p.2 directly asked the introducer of the loan to pay Rs.15,000 instantly on the same day by threatening and domination. Out of fear and panic the introducer in consultation with complainant paid Rs.15,000/- against receipt dated 07.09.2013. Complainant submitted the final settlement letter dated 17.09.2013. Complainant being shocked by the sudden aggression of the o.p.2 approached the office of the o.p.2 seeking clarification of such oppression and cruel treatment. Finding no pacifying reply complainant knocked the door of the CA Department for amicable solution but in vain due non-cooperation on the part of the o.p.2. Being aggrieved with such intrusive and offensive action of  the o.p.2 and having no other alternative the complainant lodged this complaint seeking relief by demanding the said  amount of Rs.15,000/- with interest @ Rs.18% per annum with compensation of Rs.50,000/- for mental agony and humiliation by the o.p.2 and litigation cost of Rs.25,000/-.

                   O.ps contested the case by submitting w/v and denied all the allegations leveled against them. O.p.2 states that complainant availed loan of  Rs.25,200/- for purchase of PC at 00.00% per annum with monthly EMI of Rs.1,271/- to be paid in 24 installments. Complainant failed to pay the last 10 installments. The complainant approached the o.p.2 in November,2009 about the cause of discontinuation of payment & seeking consideration of further payment to clear the loan. Thus the loan was unpaid for a period of one and half year and it was, then, cleared by the complainant. But due to oversight loan a/c was not closed and notice was issued to the introducer of the complainant for immediate payment of Rs.15,000/-.

                 However, when notice was received, o.p. promptly reacted for refunding of Rs.15,000/-to the complainant. O.p. received notice and copy of complaint from DCDRF, Kol, Unit-1, and on the same day o.p. investigated this matter, updated its record arranged for refund of  an amount of Rs.15,000/- vide DD No.387096 dated 21.12.2014 to the complainant. But the said DD for the best reason known to the complainant has not been accepted by him.

            On the basis of the pleading & submission of the party the following points are to be decided :

1. Whether there was deficiency in service/ UTP on the part of the o.ps.
2. Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for.

Decision with reasons

         All  points are taken up  together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.

   We have gone through the petition, written version and other documents. It is an admitted fact that the complainant was intimidated for wrongful recovery of loan of Rs15000/- by op 2 from the complainant. In order to prove the case the complainant adduced evidence and necessary documents against which ops have no objection. There is no points to disbelieve the case of the complainant. Moreover Ops are willing to return the money which were forcibly collected by the op-2 from the introducer of the borrower of loan.

 In view of above we find deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practices on the part of the ops and therefore complainant had to suffer a lot from threatening and intimidation. With patience the complainant knocked every possible door of rendering relief/justice to identify himself a genuine consumer and therefore, complaint is entitled to get relief. Thus, all points are disposed of accordingly.

As a result the complaint petition succeeds.

            Hence, ordered

            That the case no.478/2014 is allowed on contest with cost.

          The o.p. is directed to refund  Rs.15,000/- to the complainant along with  compensation  of Rs.6,000/- for mental agony  and litigation cost of Rs.3,000/-. O.ps. are also directed to pay jointly and / or severally the aforesaid amount within 30 days from the date of communication of this order i.d., an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.

           Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.