View 30724 Cases Against Finance
View 30724 Cases Against Finance
Baikuntha Nath Jena filed a consumer case on 23 Jun 2015 against Branch Manager Magma Sarchi Finance Ltd. in the Jajapur Consumer Court. The case no is CC/118/2013 and the judgment uploaded on 02 Jul 2015.
IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.
Present:1. Shri Biraja Prasad Kar, President,
2. Shri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,
3. Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.
Dated the 23rd day of June,2015.
C.C.Case No.118 of 2013
Baikuntha Nath Jena, S/O Balabhadra jena
At. Rekutia,Tarimul, Ghasipur,Jajpur Road, ……………..Complainant
(Versus)
1. Branch Manager/ Branch Head, Magma Sarchi Finance Ltd, Nirmala plaza
A-1,Forest park, Bhubaneswar.
2. Branch Manager /Branch Head, Magma Sarchi Finance Ltd, Jajpur Road
Dist.. Jajpur. ……………………Opp.Parties . .
For the Complainant: Mr. Deba Prasad Tripathy, Sri P. Mishra ,Advocates.
For the Opp.Parties : Sri A.K. Pahil, Advocate .
Date of order : 23.06.2015.
SHRI BIRAJA PRASAD KAR, PRESIDENT.
Deficiency in service is the grievance of the complainant.
Brief facts of the complainant’s case are that the complainant to eke out his lively hood purchased an Ashok Ley land 2516H /3T Truck bearing Regd. No. 0R-09-G-7235 after availing a loan from the O.Ps. under Hire Purchase Agreement. The complainant has paid the entire dues amounting to Rs.14,15,850/- to the O.Ps. . The complainant after repayment of the dues of the O.Ps. rushed to the office of the O.Ps. several times to get the N.O.C, but the O.Ps. did not gave the N.O.C and arbitrarily demanded Rs.80,000/- which amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service . The further case of the complainant is that the O.Ps. have charged 36% of interest on D.P.C which is not sustainable in law in view of the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Odisha in W.P case No.17720/2008 . Hence the rate of interest on D.P.C be calculated at the rate of 9% per annum. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. the complainant filed this complaint with the prayer to direct the O.Ps.
(i) not to demand Rs.80,000/- ,(ii) to issue N.O.C /N.D.C in favour of the complainant
and (iii) to pay Rs.15,000/- towards mental agony and litigation charges.
On being noticed the O.Ps. have appeared through their advocate and filed their written version refuting the allegations made in the complaint petition. It is avered in the written version that the complainant is a regular defaulter. He has never paid the installments in due date. As per agreement the receivable amount is Rs.1436900 whereas he has paid Rs.1415850/- which is less than the receivable amount. As held in the case of Rashpal singh Bahia & Others Vrs. Surinder Kaur and Others 2008(2) Civil Court Cases 778(P & H) that one who comes to court must come with clean hands. A person whose case is based on falsehood has no right to approach the court. He can be thrown out at any stage of the litigation. As per Arbitration Clause in the Agreement entered into between the parties hereto : all disputes, differences, claims and questions whatsoever arising out of this Agreement shall be referred to the Arbitrator. In the present case the matter has already been sent to learned Arbitrator Swapan Kumar Cheetterjee and the award was passed on merit on 31.12.2010. In view of the aforesaid award a sum of Rs.485885/- is due from the complainant and the Hon’ble Forum does not have the jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as per decision of the NCDRC, New Delhi in the matter of “ The Installment Supply Ltd.Vs. Kangra Ex-Service man Transport Co. & Another” 2006 (3) CPR-339(NC) wherein it was settled that a complaint can not be decided by the Consumer Forum after passing of the Arbitration Award.
On the date of hearing we have heard arguments from the learned advocates for both the parties. Perused the record and documents available on record.
On the above facts we have gone through the order passed by Hon’ble national Commission reported in 2006(3) CPR-339(NC) (The Installment Supply Ltd Vrs. Kangra Ex-serviceman Transport Co. and another ) where in it is held that:
“ A complaint can not be decided by consumer Fora after an arbitration award is already passed “.
We have also verified the photo copy of the Arbitration award. The Arbitration Award is passed on 31.12.10 and the present dispute is filed on 18.12.13 which is after the passing of the arbitration award by the arbitrator.
Basing on the pleadings, documents available on record, circumstances of the case and decision cited above we are of the opinion that when the disputed having been decided ,award was made by the sole arbitrator, the subsequent C.C. Case filed by the complainant is not maintainable.
O R D E R
Resultantly, the Consumer Complaint is dismissed against the O.Ps. on contest without any cost .
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 23rd day of June ,2015 under my hand and seal of the Forum.
(Shri Pitabas Mohanty )
Member. (Shri Biraja Prasad Kar)
President.
(Miss Smita Ray) Typed to my dictation & corrected by me
Lady Member.
(Shri Biraja Prasad Kar )
President.
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.