Orissa

Jharsuguda

CC/62/2014

Uma Shankar Thakur S/O- Late Hansaraj Thakur - Complainant(s)

Versus

BM TATA Motors Finance Ltd Sambalpur Branch - Opp.Party(s)

Abdul Zalil

11 Mar 2015

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JHARSUGUDA

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 62 OF 2014

 

Uma Shankar Thakur (55 Yrs),

S/O- Late Hansraj Thakur,

RO: Bandhbahal Colony, Qtr.No. M/705 PO: Bandhbahal, 

PS: banharpali,  Dist:Jharsuguda,Odisha………………………..…………Complainant.

     

                                           

Versus

 

1. The Branch Manager,

Tata Motors Finance Ltd.,

Sambalpur Branch, Balaji Tower 2^nd Floor, In front of Diamond Laundry,

G.M.College Road,Dist: Sambalpur, Odisha.

 

2. Branch manager,

Tata Motors Finance Ltd.,

At: 1^st Floor Dua Complex,Panposh Road, Rourkela,

Dist: Sundargarh, Odisha.

 

3. Branch Manager, Customer Care,

Tata Motors Finance Ltd.,

At: 1-Think Techno Campus Building A, 2^nd Floor Off Pokhran Road-2,

Thane West- 400 607 ( Maharashtra )

 

4. Kali Charan Das, Collection Agent,

S/O: Not known, Tata Motors Finance Ltd.,

At: Gumadera, Nayapada,

PO/PS: Belpahar, Dist: Jharsuguda, Odisha………….……….…...Opp. Parties.

 

 

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant                          Shri Abdul Zalil, Adv. & Associates.

For the Opp. Party                             Shri A.K.Sahoo, Adv. Associates.

 

Date of Order: 11.03.2015

Present

                                                1. Shri S.L.Behera, President.

                                                2. Shri S.K. Ojha, Sr. Member.

                                                3. Smt. A. Nanda, Member.

 

Shri S.L.Behera, President : - The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that, the complainant is the owner of one Ten wheeler Truck bearing Regn. No.OR-23-0544 which has been financed by the O.Ps for an amount of Rs.26,30,000/- only without interest. The complainant was liable to pay the loan amount in 47 nos. of regular monthly installments of Rs.75,430/- only started from dtd. 02.10.2012 to 02.08.2016. The complainant has paid Rs.14,10,540/- only till date of filing of this case but the O.Ps. are reflecting Rs.13,88,960/- only  and demanding Rs.3,45,930/- only towards overdue charges illegally and threatening the complainant to seize his vehicle, hence this case.

The O.Ps. appeared through their counsel after being noticed and filed written version wherein it has been stated that the complainant availed loan of Rs.26,30,000/- only vide agreement No. 5001028414 and further submitted that  the complainant is a defaulter in making payments of installments and he has outstanding dues of Rs.5,28,918/- only upto dated 10.09.2014 with denying all the allegations imposed by the complainant, the O.P has prayed for dismissal of the case.  The O.Ps. further submitted that the complainant does not come under the definitions of Consumer Protection Act as the loan availed are for commercial purpose and have also another commercial vehicle bearing Regn.No. OD-23B-6144 and he has also filed another case in respect of the said vehicle before this Hon’ble Forum vide C.C.Case No. 60/2014 and filed several citations.

Heard and perused the case record along with materials available. Though the complainant has cleared all the dues of the vehicle bearing Regn.No.OR-23B-6144 the O.Ps. have mentioned as guarantor against another vehicle financed in his favour. As an another case is pending on another vehicle bearing Regn.No. OD-23-0544 purchased under higher purchase scheme, in this regard Hon’ble National CDR Commission, New Delhi has held in a case between Eicher Motors Ltd. Vrs. Dilip Chandra Kanta Vaidya & Ors. bearing First Appeal No. 365 of 1999 that “engaged in transportation of passenger- purchasing two more buses- cannot be says that he could drive both buses without employing driver- held that neither the complainant / respondent was consumer nor the buses were purchased for self-employment to cover it under exclusion from the phrase commercial purpose- complaint must fails on these grounds”.

As per the above facts and circumstances we do not found any merit in this case, hence we dismiss the complaint case with no costs.

            Accordingly the case is disposed of.

Order pronounced in the open court today the 11^th day of March’ 2015 and copy of this order shall be supplied to the parties as per rule.    

              I Agree.                                   I Agree,                                                                                                       

                                         

S.K.Ojha, Sr.Member               A.Nanda, Member (W)                S. L. Behera President 

                                            Dictated and corrected by me

                                             S. L. Behera, President.