DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JHARSUGUDA

CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO.112 OF 2018

Smt. Durgasini Deheria (33 Yrs.),

D/O- Rabiratna Deheria,

RO: AT- Panchagaon, PS- Rengali,  

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

Versus

1. Bank Manager, IndusInd Bank,

Branch Office AT- Sambalpur,

(In front of LIC building , Budharaja, Changed to Ainthapali)

2. Rabinarayan Pandey,

(Collection Manager, IndusInd Bank, Sambalpur)

3. Sagar Behera,

(Finance Agent, InsdusInd Bank, Sambalpur).……….…....……..Opp. Parties

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant                                Self

For the Opp. Parties                               Self, Non(Ex-parte)

Date of Order: 06.12.2019

Present

                                      1. Shri Santosh Kumar Ojha, President I/C.

                                      2. Smt. Anamika Nanda, Member(W).

Shri Santosh Kumar Ojha, President I/C.: - This is the case of complainant against O.Ps as the O.Ps have repossessed the vehicle of complainant forcefully without any prior intimation and failed to appear before this Hon’ble Forum even after providing sufficient opportunities and intentionally harassing the complainant.

In brief, the facts of complainant’s case is that, the complainant had purchased a Tata Magic, passenger carrying four wheeler vehicle bearing Regn. No. OD-15-G-3612 to earn for her livelihood which was financed by the O.Ps  amounting Rs.3,18,060/- only excluding down payment by executing loan contract no. OSS01117G, dtd. 20.08.2016. The said financed amount had to repaid by the complainant with interest thereon in 48 Nos. of monthly installments before 21.07.2020. The complainant had continuously paid 17 numbers of monthly installments in time and due to medical problems in her family she could not pay for the month of November and December 2016 so also for October 2018.

The O.Ps without giving any prior notice to the complainant all of sudden illegally and forcefully seized the vehicle on dt. 03.11.2018. The said vehicle was the only source of income of the complainant. On the above mentioned attitudes of the O.Ps the complainant knocked the door of this Hon’ble Forum seeking proper relief. 

The O.Ps. after being noticed failed to appear and file their written version even after providing sufficient opportunities and stand ex-parte ultimately.

Heard from the complainant in length.

The complainant purchased the vehicle in question for Rs. 4,67,625/- only which was financed by the O.Ps amounting Rs. 3,18,060/- only on dtd. 20.08.2016 (excluding O.P. No.4). The financed amount was to repaid by the complainant in 48 numbers of monthly installments on or before dtd. 21.07.2020. The complainant was paying the monthly installments regularly but due to occurrence of medical problems and unavoidable circumstances she could not pay two installments continuously and in total four numbers of installments but interested to clear her dues within agreement period along with further EMIs. The O.Ps in the meantime repossessed the vehicle without giving any prior notice or intimation to the complainant. The complainant rushed to the O.Ps and requested her best by paying all the dues for releasing of her vehicle but the O.Ps did not take any heed. As per the notice of the complainant, the vehicle in question has been sold by the O.Ps to any third party. The O.Ps have not given any opportunity to the complainant for releasing of her vehicle even after the complainant wanted to clear all the current dues.

The O.Ps kept silent in this case even after noticed which reveals that the O.Ps have nothing to say in this case. The O.P No.4 added as an proforma O.P in this case and as per the submission of complainant he has compiled the direction of Hon’ble Forum, though he has not filed any written version. Thus there is no case against O.P No.4.

The O.Ps have seized /repossessed the vehicle of complainant illegally which is bad in the eye law and that to prevent the complainant from any opportunity in necessary releasing of her vehicle. The activities of O.Ps reflects and denotes towards gross deficiency in service and adoption of unfair trade practice.

Hence the present case of complainant is hereby allowed with following directions to the O.Ps.

ORDER

1. The O.P. No. 1 to O.P No.3 are hereby directed jointly and severally to release the vehicle bearing Regn. No. OD-15-G-3612 in favour of the complainant in as is where is condition.
2. The O.P. No. 1 to O.P No.3 are hereby further directed jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- ( Rupees fifty thousand) only to the complainant towards compensation, mental agony, harassment including litigation costs.
3. The O.P. No. 1 to O.P No.3 are hereby further more directed jointly and severally to receive the outstanding dues amount in four numbers of equal  installments without any charges or interest thereon alongwith regular EMIs from the complainant.
4. All the aforesaid orders are to be carried out within 30(thirty) days from the date of receipt of this order failing which the abovementioned O.Ps  shall be liable for interest @12% per annum on the above mentioned awarded amount till its realization.  

            Accordingly the case is disposed of.

Order pronounced in the open court today the 06^th day of December 2019. Free copy of this order shall be supplied to the parties as per rule.

                                                              I Agree             

                                                             A.Nanda, Member (W)                S.K.Ojha, President I/C.           

                                             Dictated and corrected by me

S.K.Ojha, President I/C.