Orissa

Anugul

CC/82/2022

Dillip Kumar Nanda - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bajaj Finserv - Opp.Party(s)

29 Mar 2023

ORDER

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
ANGUL
 
Complaint Case No. CC/82/2022
( Date of Filing : 23 Nov 2022 )
 
1. Dillip Kumar Nanda
At/P.O/P.S-Samal Barrage, Via-Talcher, Dist.-Angul-759037
Angul
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Bajaj Finserv
Having its Branch Office, At-Hatatota,Talcher, P.O/P.S-Talcher, Dist-Angul-759100
Angul
Odisha
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Saroj Kumar Sahoo PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MS. Sasmita Kumari Rath MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 29 Mar 2023
Final Order / Judgement

Sri S.K.Sahoo,President.

          This  is  a petition filed by the   complaint  U/s. 35 of C.P.Act, 2019  for  certain relief/ reliefs.

2.       The  case  of the  complainant  is that he   has availed  a loan  of Rs. 3,56,000.00 from the  opp.party  after execution of  agreement  bearing No. U18PLFFY-816963 of the  year 2018. There was  a condition that the  complainant is to repay the  loan amount   through instalment @ Rs.11,025.00  upto  2020. Due to  Covid-19 pandemic  the  loan amount  has been reduced  from Rs.11,025.00  to Rs. 4084.00 . The  complainant  was allowed to  repay the  instalments @ Rs. 4084 upto  May, 2022. The  opp.party has  converted the  loan conditions  from  fixed  to  hybrid flexible loan  and  the instalment  amount  was fixed @ Rs, 6312.00 instead  of  Rs.4,084.00  without  any intimation to the complainant which  caused  financial  loss to the  complainant  and  subjected  him to  mental harassment. The complainant  raised strong  objection regarding  the  enhancement  of   instalment  amount  but to keep  his Civil record Good, repaid the  loan    instalments on  higher  amount. The  opp.party has  deducted  an amount of R. 6312.00  from the  account of  the complainant   on 02.09.2022  towards  instalments of the  loan. The   complainant  intend  to  fix  the instalment   @ Rs. 4084.00  and return  of the  excess  money which has been  deducted  by the   opp.party. A legal notice  was  sent  to the opp.party  but  no  response. Hence this  complaint. 

3.       Notice  was  issued to the  opp.party  through Regd. Post with A.D from this  Commission  on 15.12.2022. The  A.D  and the  notice issued to the opp.party  is  not  back. Moreover  one  month has been elapsed  after despatch of  one  notice  to the opp.party   in  correct address through   Regd. Post  with A.D, for  which the  service  deemed  to  be   sufficient  U/s. 27  of  General  Clauses Act.

4.       Inspite  of  notice  issued  to the opp.party through  Regd. Post with A.D ,  he  did not  appear  before this Commission to file  their  written statement  or contest the  case.

5.       As per   the  complaint petition  the  complainant has  availed  a  loan  of Rs. 3,56,000.00 from the opp.party by  executing  a loan agreement in the  year 2018 . It  further  transpires  from the  complaint  petition  that the  instalments  amount  was  fixed @  Rs. 11,025.00  but  due  to  pandemic  situation Covid-19,  it  was  reduced  to Rs. 4,084.00 . It is  further alleged by the  complainant  that  without any intimation to  him the opp.party has raised  the instalment  amount  to Rs. 6,312.00 and  deducted from  his  account  on 02.09.2022 . It is  further alleged that the opp.party has  deducted  an amount of Rs. 13,368.00 , violating the  agreement  during  the  pandemic  period. Inspite of   notice the  opp.party  did  not  turn-up. It  is   also clear that the  complaint  has issued  a legal notice to the opp.party  on 12.10.2022 through Regd. Post with A.D. From the  tracking report  submitted by the  complainant  it  also appeares that the   said   legal  notice issued to the opp.party has been  duly  served on him on 18.10.2022. So  from the    materials  on record  it is clear that the  allegations made by the  complaint in his  complaint  petition are  true.  The alteration of   the  terms of the   agreement  unilaterally  by the opp.party is  a  gross  deficiency in service on his  part. The   increase of the amount  of the  monthly instalment  of Rs. 6312.00  instead of  Rs. 4084.00  by the opp.party is  illegal and  arbitrary.

6.       Hence  order :-

: O R D E R :

          The  case  be  and  the  same  is allowed  exparte  against the opp.party. The opp.party is  directed to   return  an amount of Rs.13,368.00(Rupees Thirteen Thousand Three Hundred Sixty-Eight) only  to the  complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order  and  realise the  monthly  instalment @ Rs.4084.00  (Rupees Four Thousand Eighty-Four) only   from the  complainant.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Saroj Kumar Sahoo]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MS. Sasmita Kumari Rath]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.