DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 19th day of October, 2022
Present : Sri.Vinay Menon V., President
: Smt.Vidya A., Member
: Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member
Date of Filing: 02/08/2021
CC/115/2021
Prajith C .P,
S/o.Prabhakaran C.P,
Choozhikattil House,
Mulanjoor Post,
Palakkad-677 511.
(Party in person) - Complainant
Vs
Bajaj Finance Limited,
Branch Office, Ottapalam,
Near N S S K P T High School . - Opposite party
(By Adv. S Sidharthan)
O R D E R
By Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member
Pleadings of the complainant in brief.
- The complainant purchased a Samsung A31 model mobile phone from “My G” show room with the financial assistance from the opposite party. The loan amount was to be repaid in 10 monthly installments of Rs.1650/-. Installments were paid promptly for seven months after which there was default in payment due to Covid 19. The allegation of the complainant is that the opposite party disconnected the mobile phone without giving any intimation to him. When he enquired with the opposite party, it was informed that the connection will be restored once the repayment is regularized. The defaulted amount was settled under one time settlement and Rs.4250/- was paid on 15.07.2021. Even after making this payment the connection has not been restored. Due to the disconnection of the mobile phone he has suffered loss in business. Hence he has approached this Commission for a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- towards loss in business and Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony suffered by him.
- Notice was sent to the opposite party and they entered appearance and filed their version. According to them they had not disconnected the mobile service to the complaint, but the hand set was locked after giving advance intimation to him since the complainant defaulted in paying the installment as per the terms and conditions of the loan sanctioned to him .
When the defaulted loan was settled, the complainant was not contactable for unloacking the hand set. Their further contention is that the complaint is not maintainable under the provision Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and quoted several earlier judgments of Courts and National Commission in this regard.
- The complainant has not filed proof affidavit and not marked any documents as evidence in support of his pleadings. The opposite party has also not filed proof affidavit and adduced any evidence in support of their arguments. Hence the case was taken for orders based on merits.
- In the absence of proof affidavit and documentary evidence from the side of the complainant or the opposite party, this Commission is unable to examine the merits of this case. Hence the complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in open court on this the 19th day of October, 2022.
Sd/-
Vinay Menon V
President
Sd/-
Vidya A
Member
Sd/-
Krishnankutty N.K.
Member
APPENDIX
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant: NIL
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite party : NIL
Witness examined on the side of the complainant :-Nil
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party:-NIL
Cost : NIL.
