ORDER BY HON’BLE PRESIDENT- MR. P.K. PADHI:
JUDGMENT
Complainant has filed this consumer complaint U/s.12 of C.P. Act, 1986 seeking following reliefs;
“Direct the opposite party to issue NOC for exclusive recording of the name of the complainant in the R.C. Book, not to repossess the Tractor , waive out the illegal demand of Rs.79,882/- as raised by the opposite party after full closure of the loan account and pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and financial loss”.
The brief fact of the case is that, the complainant is an unemployed man who in order to earn bread and butter for himself and his family members wanted to have a tractor with trolley. Due to financial incapacity the complainant approached the opposite party for finance and accordingly opposite party suggested the complainant for a down payment of Rs.1,20,000/- which was immediately complied and thereby sanctioned a loan of Rs.4,65,129/- on 10.3.2007. The opposite party fixed 60 EMI @ Rs.10,360/- per month starting from 09.4.2007 to 13.8.2013 with an agreement value of Rs.5,59,680/-. The complainant has already paid Rs.5,59,680/- as per the customer statement of account report on 13.8.2013 the loan account balance is zero. After closure of the loan complainant wanted a NOC from the opposite party but on 14.7.2014 refused to issue NOC and demanded a further sum of Rs.79,882/- from the complainant for final closure of the loan.
The opposite party filed his written version stating that, as on 26.9.2014 the complainant has paid all the 54 loan installments but the said periodical installments were not paid within the specified due date as per the loan agreement. Going by the statement of account, it is crystal clear that, the complainant cannot be said to be a regular payer, since he has been very irregular in making the payment of the loan whereas the specified due date and time for payment of the installments was the essence of the said loan agreement and this being the reason, late payment charges/additional financial charges of Rs.48,082/- had accrued. The complainant had defaulted in making payment of the said Rs.48,082/-. This being the reason, the appellant could not issue NOC in favour of the complainant until and unless the complainant did not clear his said dues.
The main contention of the opposite party for not issuing NDC is regarding nonpayment of additional financial charges of Rs.48,082/- for which NOC has not been issued. The overdue amount has been accrued due to late payment of installments in almost every month. Both parties are absent on call. We are not briefed about present status of the case of both parties, status of vehicle and the parties.
We therefore direct the opposite party to deduct overdue charges from the amount due to be paid as on the date of payment and on payment of the due amount, the NOC in favour of the complainant shall be issued within seven days from the date of receipt of the amount to be paid. With the aforesaid observation and direction the consumer complaint is disposed of. No cost.
Pronounced in the open Commission on this 18th January,2023.
