MR. BIBEKANANDA DAS, MEMBER:-
This present C.C.Case No. 10/2020 was filed due to arbitrary action of Op No.1 & 2 (Bank) where they imposed arbitrary outstanding loan amount upon the Complainant. Perused the materials/documents available on record and gone through the complaint petition and written version filed by the Op-Bank. Heard the matter in length from the Complainant in person & Ld. Counsel for the Bank. The Complainant in absence of alternate efficacious remedy available the Complainant compelled to file the present C.C.Case before this Commission & prayed to direct the Ops to settle her loan A/C as per law.
Brief facts:-
Complainant’s case in brief is that she purchased an APE DISELAR 3STR passenger auto Regd. No. OD-29B-5868 availed loan from Indusind Bank Ltd. Chandikhole Branch vide agreement No. OBC00617G dt. 18.08.2015 against cost of vehicle Rs. 2,04,700/- returnable in 47 installments Rs. 5986/-/months. The Branch Manager Biswajit Prusty acting as Branch Manager collected money & few installments remain unpaid due to unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of Complainant. The loan account was N.P. The Bank issued outstanding dues letter on 01/07/2019 was Rs. 29,430/- also to the co-borrower dt. 01/12/2019 the outstanding was Rs. 38,120/- then on dt. 09.12.2019 issued outstanding Rs. 51727/-. Finally the Op-Bank demanded Rs. 22,000/- for final settlement instead of closing the account threatened to repossess the vehicle which is arbitrary & illegal & for redressal filed present C.C.Case.
Issue No.1
Complainant being an unemployed lady to earn her livelihood purchased an auto arranged finance from OPNo.1 & 2 Bank. The Complainant is a consumer who availed “Service” which includes financing under Sec-2(42) therefore the Complainant is a consumer & the Op No.1 & 2 are service provider.
Issue No.2
The letter of loan outstanding received by Complainant so also by co-borrower on 2019 and the C.C.Case was filed in 2020 well within the prescribed period of limitation period.
Issue No.3
The Op No.1 & 2 are having the interest after the account was N.P.A non paying account therefore the increasing interest after declared N.P.A against the principle of RBI guideline & non supply of account statement is deficiency of service under Sec-2(11) so also the agreement entered into was unfair contract under Sec-2(46) & the trade practice practised by OpNo.1 & 2 are unfair trade practice under Sec-2(47) 0f C.P.Act,2019.
Issue No.4
The OpNo.1 & 2 stated in their written version that the loan agreement has arbitration clause & the same referred to arbitration & an awarded already passed on dt. 21.09.2020 under ARACA 1996 by Ld. Sole Arbitrator S. Prassadh ex-parte at Chennai where Ld. Arbitrator awarded Rs. 51727/- with @18% interest which is illegal & arbitrary award the Complainant being poor lady unable to file appeal under arbitration & conciliation Act-1996. Further the OpNo.1 & 2 submitted that this Ld. DCDRC has no power to adjudicate the case when an award already passed on same loan outstanding against Complainant.
We gone through as recent Judgment of Honbl’e NCDRC 2022(2)CPR50 Parklands pride Buyer Association vs BPTP Ltd. & Another decided on 14/02/2022 regarding arbitration clause that arbitration clause in the agreement does not bar the jurisdiction of the consumer Fora to entertain the complaint. We are quasi judicial bodies being the 1st Jurisdiction Commission to address the grievances of consumer within time bound mandate provisions. We have entrusted with jurisdiction under C.P.Act.2019 to test the authenticity of an award passed by the appointed tribunal established on consent of Op No.1 & 2 where the Complainant did not given opportunity & if the arbitration could have been within Orissa then Complainant could appeared before it. Taking all facts & circumstances the award passed on dt. 21.09.2020 in A.C.P. No. 1510/2019 wherein an award Rs. 51727/- with interest @18% is liable to be quashed by this quasi judicial Commission & resultantly the same has been quashed. The Complainant not bound by the said award.
Issue No.5
The Op No.1 & 2 did not provided actual outstanding only issued different letters for mentioned amount, the Complainant can’t pay interest from date of N.P.A as per RBI guideline. The OpNo.1 & 2, Bank failed to produce statement of account with their written version which shown their intention not clear. The arbitration award passed illegally, arbitrary which is quashed. The Complainant can only settle the loan account on payment of Rs. 11,000/- finally. When the Complainant pay Rs. 11,000/- the OpNo.1 & 2 shall provide NOC forthwith.
O R D E R
It is directed on payment of Rs. 11,000/- by the Complainant to the OpNo.1 & 2 they shall provide NOC to the Complainant within a period of one month from receipt of this order otherwise the OpNo.1 & 2 shall liable under Sec-72 of C.P.Act.2019 for disobedience of an order of quasi-judicial Commission. The C.C.Case is allowed but no order as to cost.
Issue extract of the order to the parties for compliance.
Pronounced in the open Commission, on this the 3rd day of January,2023.
I, agree.
Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER
