DISTRICT  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  COMMISSION,

                                         PATIALA                                               

                                             Consumer Complaint No.189 Dt.21/05/2018                                                                                                                                           Decided on:      11/09/2020

Jyoti Soni aged about 34 years, Wife of Munish Soni R/o House No.B-2/1100, Banwari, Ward No.18, Rajpura Tehsil and District Patiala.

  …...Complainant

Versus

Balaji Automobiles (TVS) Under bridge road, Near New Court Complex, Rajpura Pin Code:140401, District Patiala through its Manager/ Authorized Person.

                                                                                               ….Opposite Party. 

                                    Complaint under Section 11 to 14 of the                               Consumer  Protection  Act, 1986.  

QUORUM

                                Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President                                                                                                                                                            Sh. Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member 

ARGUED BY:

Sh. Gagandeep Singh Kalra Adv. counsel for complainant.   

                                  Sh.  K. S. Sidhu Adv. counsel for the OP.

 ORDER

                                   JASJIT  SINGH BHINDER, PRESIDENT

 1.                        Jyoti Soni complainant  has filed this complaint under Section 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act,  (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Opposite Party namely  Balaji Automobiles (hereinafter referred to as the OP).

2.                Brief facts of the case is that complainant  approached the OP for purchase of one Scooty on installments by making down payment of Rs.10,000/- on which OP had obtained copies of all necessary documents from the complainant and had assured that OP will itself get the loan sanctioned from HDFC Bank Rajpura because the OP is having tie up with the said bank. Later on the OP told to the complainant that loan has been sanctioned. As such the complainant had purchased a vehicle make TVS Jupiter Classic BSIV DISC-B bearing Engine No.EG4CJ1704950 and Chassis No.MD626 EG49J1C03411, Model 2018 from the OP for a sum of  Rs.57,417/- vide invoice No.SL-4 dt. 03/04/2018. At that time the complainant paid down payment of Rs.10,000/- to the Op vide receipt No.S-6 dt. 03/04/2018. At the time of the delivery of the vehicle to the complainant, the OP has also issued one insurance policy of the said vehicle  under the signature and seal of the OP for which OP separately charged Rs.2160/- from the complainant. The name of the bank with which the vehicle is hypothecated by Op is also mentioned as   HDFC  Bank   Ltd.   Rajpura.   OP  has   also  received   Rs.2000/-     

separately as file charges and also received amount for getting prepared the RC of the said vehicle. However no receipt was issued by the OP regarding this amount.

                   It is alleged that complainant has also deposited  Rs.3500/- with the OP as first installment vide receipt No.S-75 dt. 30/04/2018.  Now Op is threatening the complainant to take away the vehicle from her forcibly and illegally and are claiming that the loan has not been disbursed and the amount received from the complainant will be forfeited. Op refused to hand over the RC  of the vehicle to the complainant. The complainant is ready to pay the installments to the OP or the bank after the loan is sanctioned.  Complainant visited many times to the OP and request to provide her original RC of the vehicle  but the OP officials misbehaved with the complainant and refused for the same.

                   With this background of facts, the complainant has filed the present complaint with the prayer  that Op be restrained from taking forcible and illegal possession of the vehicle from the complainant and that OP be directed to handover the loan documents to the complainant and that if the OP could not get the loan sanctioned, then to refund the amount of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant along with interest @ 18%, to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of inconvenience, mental agony, harassment, humiliation and mental tension, to pay Rs.5000/- as costs and Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses.

3.                Upon notice, OP appeared through counsel and filed written version. OP has taken preliminary objections that  complaint is not maintainable at all and the same is false and frivolous as such is liable to be dismissed. Complainant has not approached the Hon’ble Forum with clear hand and has concealed the true and material facts. It is alleged that complainant played a fraud with the Op and failed to get the loan sanctioned from HDFC Bank, as there are adverse remarks against the complainant in CIBIL Report. The complainant has only paid Rs.10,000/- to the OP and took the vehicle from the Op and after the purchase  the complainant has failed to pay the remaining amount of the sale price of the said vehicle, except the amount of Rs.3500/- paid in the month of April, 2018. Complaint is bad for non joinder of necessary parties. On merits it is alleged that at the time of purchase of the vehicle by the complainant, the complainant assured the OP for getting a loan sanctioned from HDFC Bank and to pay the amount of the vehicle in installments after getting the loan sanctioned. It is correct that the complainant paid Rs.10,000/- at the time of purchase of the vehicle. Since the complainant assured to get the loan sanctioned from HDFC Bank and requested the OP to mention the name of HDFC Bank in Col. Of hypothecation on the invoice, accordingly the Op mentioned the name of HDFC Bank on the bill dt.03/04/2018 but complainant failed to get the loan sanctioned from HDFC Bank and other banks due to adverse remarks in CIBIL Report. The total price of the said vehicle is Rs.65767/-  i.e. Rs.57,417/- as sale price, Rs.8350/- as RC, insurance and  charges of accessory and  out of it the complainant paid Rs.10,000/- in advance and Rs.3500/- thereafter. Thus complainant has paid a total amount of Rs.13,500/- and an amount of Rs.52,267/- is due against the complainant since May 2018. It is alleged that OP never threatened to take the possession of the vehicle. However the OP has every right to take the possession of the vehicle. It is not the duty of the OP to get the loan sanctioned for the complainant. It is alleged that OP so many times verbally approached and requested the complainant for making payment of the balance amount but the complainant did not pay any heed to the request of the OP rather has filed a false complaint against the OP. After denying all other allegations made in the complaint, prayer has been made to dismiss the complaint.

4.                In support of the complaint, Ld. counsel for the complainant tendered in evidence Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant along with documents Ex.C-1 copy of invoice dt.3/4/2018, Ex.C-2 copy of  receipt dt.3/4/2018, Ex.C-3 copy of  Insurance policy dtl.03/04/2018, Ex.C-4 copy of receipt dt.30/04/2018 and closed the evidence.

5.                Ld. Counsel for the OP has also tendered Ex.OPA affidavit of Anil Gogia, Partner of OP along with document Ex.OP-1 copy of  ledger and closed the evidence of the Opposite party.

6.                We have heard the ld. Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.

7.                Ld. Counsel for the complainant has argued that complainant has purchased one Scooty on installments by making the payment of Rs.10,000/-. Ld. Counsel further argued that OP has assured that Loan has been sanctioned by HDFC Bank Rajpura  as OP has tie up with the said Bank.  The scooty was purchased for a sum of Rs.57417/- vide invoice  Ex.C-1. It is further argued that OP has also charged Rs.2160/- for Insurance and Rs.2000/- more  for file charges.  It is further argued that complainant has deposited Rs.3500/- as first installment. Ld. Counsel further argued that now the OP wants to take forcible  possession of the vehicle.

8.                On the other hand ld. Counsel for the OP has argued that since from the last two years, complainant is in legal possession of the scooty and has paid  only Rs.13500/- and has not paid any further amount. Ld. Counsel for the OP further argued  that Loan was never sanctioned as there was adverse remarks against the complainant. Ld. Counsel argued that complaint is false and that it is  admitted that complainant has paid Rs.13500/- in total and now Rs.52,267/- is due towards the complainant and also prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.                Admittedly complainant purchased the scooty from the OP vide invoice Ex.C-1 on 3/4/2018 for Rs.57417/-.  Receipt Ex.C-2 vide which complainant  paid Rs.10,000/- as earnest money to the OP. The Insurance policy is Ex.C-3 in which hypothecation details  as mentioned as HDFC Bank Ltd., Rajpura. Another receipt of Rs.3500/- dt.30/04/2018 issued by the OP in favour of  the complainant. The OP in affidavit have stated that complainant has  played fraud  with OP and failed to get the loan sanctioned from the Bank. Complainant has paid Rs.13,500/- to the OP and is using the vehicle without making payment to the OP and complainant is bound to make the payment of the said vehicle. In the affidavit, it has been prayed that complaint be dismissed.

10.              Although  in Ex.C-1  the tax invoice dt.03/04/2018 and in the Insurance policy Ex.C-3, the name of the HDFC Bank is mentioned but there is no document filed by the complainant  to show that loan was ever sanctioned in her favour. Neither there is any document produced by the OP that there was adverse remark by the Bank. Admittedly the complainant has paid a total sum of Rs.13,500/- i.e. Rs.10,000/- was paid  on 3/4/2018 as earnest money and Rs.3500/-  was paid on 30/04/2018. After that  no amount was ever paid to the  OP by the complainant for purchase of the scooty. There is no document on file which can show the loan was ever sanctioned by HDFC Bank Rajpura in favour of the complainant and also there is no document on the file that he has paid the entire amount for the purchase of the scooty to the OP. As such complaint is false and frivolous and same is hereby dismissed with special cost of Rs.5000/-. Compliance of the order be made by the complainant  within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.   

ANNOUNCED*

Dated: 11/09/2020

                                     Vinod Kumar Gulati          Jasjit Singh Bhinder                                                                                                                                                   Member                                President