Order dictated by:
Ms.Rachna Arora, Member
- Mrs.Neelam Setia complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act on the allegations that complainant’s deceased husband has taken a car loan from the opposite party having account No. 3377060000573. The opposite party gave the vehicle loan of Rs. 5,55,000/- to the husband of the complainant As per the terms and conditions of the said loan, the loanee i.e. deceased husband of the complainant namely Yash Pal Setia, who unfortunately expired on 5.12.2015,was insured for the outstanding loan of the opposite party. It was settled that in the term period of loan if the loanee expired the entire outstanding loan would be written off with the insurance amount to be retrieved by the opposite party. The husband of the complainant unfortunately expired on 5.12.2015 and the opposite party was duly informed and the required documents were also provided . It was assured by the opposite party that the outstanding loan amount would be retrieved from their own Insurance company as per terms of loan agreement and bank’s loan policy. But the opposite party issued letter dated 20.4.2016 to the complainant demanding the outstanding loan amount of Rs. 3,65,436/- against the loan agreement terms. The act of the opposite party in demanding the loan outstanding amount against the policy and terms of the loan agreement is an act of deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and is not sustainable in the eyes of law . Vide instant complaint, complainant has sought for the following reliefs:-
- Opposite party be directed not to demand the loan outstanding amount to the tune of R.s 3,65,436/- and to adjust the same against the insurance cover ;
- Compensation to the tune of Rs. 50000/- alongwith litigation expenses be also awarded to the complainant.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite party appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that the opposite party gave the vehicle loan of Rs. 5,55,000/- to the husband of the complainant vide sanction letter dated 8.7.2013. Husband of the complainant also availed insurance cover for the period of two years commencing from 18.7.2013 to 17.7.2015 under India First Group Credit Life Plan issued to Bank of Baroda. As per terms and conditions of the Insurance the loanee i.e. deceased husband of the complainant namely Yashpal Setia was insured for the outstanding loan of the opposite party from India First Life Insurance for two years commencing from 18.7.2013 upto 17.7.2015 and it was settled that if during two years of commencing from 18.7.2013 valid upto 17.7.2015 if the loanee expired the entire outstanding loan would be written off with the insurance amount to be retrieved by the opposite party from India First Life Insurance Company as per the terms of the insurance. That the Insurance cover was availed by the deceased husband of the complainant for the period of two years i.e. from 18.7.2013 to 17.7.2015 and since Yashpal Setia diea on 5.12.2015 i.e. after policy maturity there is no valid claim under the said policy and the opposite party is liable to recover the outstanding loan amount. The opposite party as per terms and conditions of the loan agreement has issued letter dated 20.4.2016 to the complainant demanding the outstanding amount of Rs. 3,65,436/-. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
3. In his bid to prove the case, Sh.Deepinder Singh,Adv.counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence duly sworn affidavit of the complainant Ex.C-1, copy of notice Ex.C-2 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
4. To rebut the aforesaid evidence Sh.Vikas Mahajan,Adv.counsel for the opposite party tendered into evidence duly sworn affidavit of Sh. Raghubir Singh Nanda, Chief Manager Ex.OP1, certificate of Insurance Ex.OP2, sanction letter Ex.OP3 and closed the evidence on behalf of the opposite party.
5. We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record on the file.
6. Ld.counsel for the complainant has reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint and has vehemently been contended that the deceased husband of the complainant has taken a car loan from the opposite party and was having account No.3377060000573 and the opposite party sanctioned the vehicle loan to the tune of Rs. 5,55,000/- to the husband of the complainant. It is the case of the complainant that as per the terms and conditions of the said loan, the loanee i.e. deceased husband of the complainant namely Yash Pal Setia was insured for the outstanding loan of the opposite party and it was settled that in the term period of loan if the loanee expired the entire outstanding loan would be written off with the insurance amount to be retrieved by the opposite party. As the husband of the complainant died on 5.12.2015, as such the complainant informed the opposite party and the required documents were also provided . But the opposite party issued letter dated 20.4.2016 to the complainant demanding the outstanding loan amount of Rs. 3,65,436/- , copy of notice is Ex.C-2 on record. Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency as well as unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.
7. On the other hand ld.counsel for the opposite party has repelled the aforesaid contentions of the ld.counsel for the complainant on the ground that opposite party gave the vehicle loan of Rs. 5,55,000/- to the husband of the complainant vide sanction letter dated 8.7.2013. Husband of the complainant also availed insurance cover for the period of two years commencing from 18.7.2013 to 17.7.2015 under India First Group Credit Life Plan issued to Bank of Baroda , copy of Insurance policy is Ex. OP2. As per terms and conditions of the Insurance the loanee i.e. deceased husband of the complainant namely Yashpal Setia was insured for the outstanding loan of the opposite party from India First Life Insurance for two years commencing from 18.7.2013 upto 17.7.2015 and it was settled that if during two years of commencing from 18.7.2013 valid upto 17.7.2015 if the loanee expired the entire outstanding loan would be written off with the insurance amount to be retrieved by the opposite party from India First Life Insurance Company as per the terms of the insurance. Since Yashpal Setia, husband of the complainant died on 5.12.2015 i.e. after policy maturity, as such there is no valid claim under the said policy and the opposite party is liable to recover the outstanding loan amount. As such the opposite party issued letter dated 20.4.2016 to the complainant demanding the outstanding amount of Rs. 3,65,436/-. Ld.counsel for the opposite party has contended that there is no deficiency on the part of the opposite party.
8. From the aforesaid discussion, it becomes evident that the deceased husband of the complainant obtained vehicle loan to the tune of Rs. 5,55,000/- from the opposite party, which was duly sanctioned by the opposite party vide sanction letter Ex.OP3 on record. It was also not disputed that the deceased husband of the complainant also got insured his outstanding loan from Insurance company India First Life Insurance for two years i.e. from 18.7.2013 upto 17.7.2015 and it was settled that if during two years of commencing from 18.7.2013 valid upto 17.7.2015 if the loanee expired the entire outstanding loan would be written off with the insurance amount to be retrieved by the opposite party from India First Life Insurance Company as per the terms of the insurance. But, however, Yashpal Setia, husband of the complainant died on 5.12.2015 i.e. after policy maturity, which fact is not disputed by the complainant, as such the opposite party is entitled for the remaining loan amount of the vehicle . In this regard opposite party served a notice/letter dated 20.4.2016 to the complainant demanding the outstanding amount of Rs. 3,65,436/- which step taken by the opposite party, as per terms and conditions of the insurance policy, is valid and there is no illegality in demanding the outstanding loan amount .
9. Consequently, we hold that there is no illegality in demanding the outstanding loan amount from the complainant. As such the complaint is without any merit and substance and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum .Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated : 10.8.2017 ( Rachna Arora ) (Anoop Sharma)
Member Presiding Member
