Orissa

Rayagada

CC/188/2017

Smt. M. Sujatha Kumari - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager, PALASA - Opp.Party(s)

Self

02 Nov 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

POST  /  DIST: Rayagada,  STATE:  ODISHA,  Pin No. 765001.

                                                      ******************

C.C.case  No.       188         / 2017.                                 Date.     02   .11. 2019

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini  Kumar  Mohapatra,                                     President

Sri Gadadhara  Sahu,                                                        Member.

Smt.Padmalaya  Mishra,.                                                Member

Smt. M.Sujatha Kumari,  W/O: Sri Manoj Kumar Moharana, At/Po:Palasa, Dist:Srikakulam, Now staying at Marathiguda, Gunpur, Dist:Rayagada(Odisha).                                                     …..Complainant.

Versus.

1.The Branch Manager,  Shriram  Transpsort Finance Company Ltd.,Palasa Branch,Palasa, Dist: Srikakulam- 532222, State:Andhra  Pradesh.                                                                                                                          …Opposite parties.           

Counsel for the parties:                                 

For the complainant: - Sri P.K.Dash,Advocate.

For the O.Ps:-  Sri  K.Ch.G.S.Kumandan, Advocate, Rayagada.

 

                                                JUDGEMENT.

The  crux of the case is that  the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps    for  non return of balance amount after deducting EMI amount besides non payment of insurance amount of the damaged vehicle bearing Regd. No.AP-30W-2294 Truck inter alia non issuance of  NOC to the above vehicle besides to stop Arbitration proceeding against the complainant for which  the complainant  sought for redressal of the grievances raised by the complainant.

Upon  Notice, the O.Ps  put in their appearance and filed  written version through their learned counsels in which  they refuting allegation made against them.  The O.Ps taking one and another pleas in the written version   sought to dismiss the complaint as it is not maintainable  under the C.P. Act, 1986. The facts which are not specifically admitted may be treated  as denial of the O.Ps..   Hence the O.Ps  prays the forum to dismiss the case against  them  to meet the ends of justice.

Heard arguments from the learned counsels for the    O.P     and from the learned counsel for the complainant.    Perused the record, documents, written version  filed by the parties. 

This forum  examined the entire material on record  and given  a thoughtful consideration  to the  arguments  advanced  before us by  the  parties touching the points both on the facts  as well as on  law.

                                                    FINDINGS.

From the records it reveals that, there is no dispute that the  complainant had  availed loan  bearing loan agreement No. SRKL10011290009 for purchase of  commercial  vehicle  Truck  bearing Regd.  No. AP-30W- 2294 from the   O.Ps  a sum of Rs.2,40,000/- during the month of  November,2010. The  complainant  had  agreed to pay  the finance charges a sum of Rs.81,000/- thus in all a sum of Rs.3,21,000/- was payable by the complainant to the O.Ps. in  33 E.M.Is  starting from Dt. 5.1.2011  to 5.9.2013    as stated in the agreement.  The complainant was depositing  the E.M.I. a sum of Rs.2,36,040/- till July, 2013. In the mean Complainant’s vehicle met with accident. Then the complainant  had made repair his vehicle  investing a sum of Rs.1,36,800/-(copies of the bill Dt.22.2.2013 is in the file which is marked as Annexure-I ). Thereafter  non deposit  of the E.M.I. by the complainant  the O.Ps had taken the above finance vehicle  and sold it at throw away price in the market.  After selling the above vehicle  the O.Ps had sent  letter to the customer on Dt.17.11.2017 stating total outstanding a sum of Rs.2,43,447/- as on 4.9.2017 (copies of the same is in the file marked as Annexure-2). The efforts of the complainant  became futile and the  O.Ps failed to follow the procedure in seizing and selling the vehicle. The complainant sustained huge loss and untold agony.   In the above  Legal demand notice the O.Ps had   stated that the complainant has to pay  a sum of Rs. Rs.2,43,447/-  after selling the vehicle. Further the O.Ps also started arbitration proceeding against the complainant.  Aggrieved the above action  of the O.Ps the  complainant has filed this C.C. case before the forum  and prays the forum direct the O.Ps return of balance amount after deducting EMI amount besides to pay  insurance amount of the damaged vehicle bearing Regd. No.AP-30W-2294 Truck inter alia issuance of  NOC to the above vehicle in addition to stop Arbitration proceeding against the complainant. Hence this C.C. case.

The issues to be decided  in the dispute are:-

1. Whether this forum  has   territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint under the C.P. Act, 1986  ?
2. Whether there is any  deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?
3. If so the nature and quantum of relief to be awarded  to the complainant.

 

 

Issue No. 1.

The  O.Ps in  their written version preliminary contended that  this forum  has  no  territorial jurisdiction to entertain the  complaint.

While answering  the issue  we would like to refer the citations.  It is held and reported  in CPJ-2010(1) page No. 136   where in the  Hon’ble  State commission, New Delhi  observed  “Forum should decide the dispute of jurisdiction  first, application kept open to be decided later”.

Again  It is held and reported  in CPR-2011(4) page No. 482   the  Hon’ble  National commission,  where in observed  “Consumer forum  can not adjudicate  disputes without  addressing to the basic issues”.

Section 11(2)©  of the C.P. Act, 1986 has made  it specific that a complaint shall be instituted in a District Forum with in the local limits of whose jurisdiction  the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.  The present case in hand it is  revealed that  the  complainant had made  agreement with the O.P   at  Palasa, Dist: Srikakulam, State Andhra Pradesh which is  agreed by the complainant  in her petition which is comes under the purview  of the territorial jurisdiction  of the Dist. Consumer Forum, at Srikakulam, State: Andhra Pradesh.  In view of this we observed  that this forum  has lack of  territorial  jurisdication to entertain the dispute.  

In view of the order passed by the  Hon’ble Commission  the complaint filed in the present case before the forum to get compensation is not maintainable under the C.P. Act, 1986. As the case  is  not maintainable before the forum we need not discussed other two & three issues.  Accordingly, without  going into the merits of the case, this forum dismiss  the above complaint petition  with liberty to the complainant to seek appropriate remedy available to him before the appropriate court.

To meet the ends of justice  the following order is passed.

ORDER

 

In resultant the complaint petition     stands  dismissed. The complainant  is free to approach the court of competent  having  its jurisdiction.   Parties are left to bear their own cost.  Accordingly the case  is disposed of.

           

We appreciate  the zeal of the complainant  in filing  a complaint, but we are to regret that the complaint did not lie here and we  have got no option but to dismiss  the complaint petition.  However, the complainant  is free to approach the court of competent  having  its jurisdiction.  Since there is delay in availing the alternative remedy, we grant liberty to the  complainant to file an  application  for condo nation of delay  Under section -14 of the Limitation, Act,1963  in which  event the same shall be considered  keeping in view the pendency of the matter  before this forum.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties    free of  charges.

 

Dictated and corrected by me.

Pronounced in open forum today on this      2^nd.    day of   November, 2019  under the seal and signature of this forum. 

 

Member                                             Member.                                                 President