Orissa

Cuttak

CC/15/2019

Santosh Kumar Verma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager,Sky Automobiles - Opp.Party(s)

S Padhi & associates

21 Nov 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                                                             C.C.No.15/2019

Sri Santosh Kumar Verma,

Ward No.9,Purani Basti,

Kantabanjhi,Bolangir,Orissa-767039.                                     ... Complainant.

 

                                                Vrs.

The Branch Manager,

Sky Automobiles,

                NH 5,Bhanpur,Cuttack.                                                     … Opp. Party.

 

 

Present:               Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:     28.01.2019

Date of Order:   21.11.2022

 

For the complainant:          Mr. S.Padhi,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.P.                :         Mr. R.K.Pattnaik,Adv. & Associates.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President.                         

            Case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition in short is that having obtained a loan of Rs.4,86,000/- the complainant had purchased a vehicle from the O.P.  On 1.12.18 the complainant noticed some technical problem in the said vehicle for which he had taken the same to the O.Ps for its rectification but after some days when the O.P denied to deliver back the vehicle to the complainant, on 15.12.18 the complainant was constrained to issue a legal notice to the O.Ps and ultimately had to file this case claiming a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards his mental agony and harassment and another sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards his litigation expenses.

            He has filed copies of series of documents in order to prove his case.

2.         The O.P has contested this case and has filed an affidavit dt.19.1.20 wherein he has prayed to adhere to the objection as filed by him treating the same as the written version.  Acording to the O.P, the vehicle in question belongs to the complainant but it was given by his son namely Anil Kumar Verma as a lien of misappropriation of cash done by him while he was working as the cashier of the O.P office.  Thus, it is the contention of the O.P that the said vehicle being handed over to him as a lien they had not forcibly kept the said vehicle.  According to the O.P the complainant is a complete stranger.  Due to the misappropriation done by Anil Kumar Verma the son of the complainant, FIR was lodged by the O.P before the Sadar Polie Station,Cuttack on 7.1.19 vide P.S.Case no.14 of 2019 wherein Anil Kumar Verma had confessed his guilt and had assured to deposit the embezzled money for which he had kept the vehicle No.OD-05AL-5951 standing in the name of his father, the complainant of this case as a security deposit.  The said Anil Kumar Verma had also filed a declaration before the O.P in the form of affidavit.  The complainant by suppressing the fact had approached this Commission but not with clean hands and had sought for relief by filing his complaint petition which is liable to be dismissed with cost.

            The O.P has filed copies of several documents including the FIR as lodged by him before the police station and the declaration in the form of affidavit as submitted by Anil Kumar Verma son of Santosh Verma.

3.         Keeping in mind the averments of the complaint petition and the contents of written version, this Commission feels it proper to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a proper conclusion.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable ?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps & if there was practice of any unfair trade by the O.Ps ?

            iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed ?

Issue no.ii.

Out of the three issues, issue no.ii being the pertinent one is taken up first to be considered here in this case.

After going through the documents as available here in this case and when compared with the averments of the complaint petition together with the written version, it is noticed that the alleged vehicle in question admittedly belongs to the complainant which is under the possession of the O.P.  It is the claim of the complainant that when he noticed certain defects in the said vehicle on 1.12.18 he had taken it to the O.P but no job card was issued to him and the vehicle was not returned to him subsequently. On the other hand, it is the plea of the O.P that Anil Kumar Verma the son of the complainant had given the vehicle of his father to the O.P as lien in order to deposit the embezzled money as done by him while he was working as a cashier in the office of the O.P.  Admittedly there is FIR lodged as regards to the embezzlement by the said Anil Kumar Verma before the Sadar P.S of Cuttack.  Be that as it may, when the vehicle in question stands in the name of the complainant and it is the complainant who is claiming back the said vehicle from the O.P; by detaining the said vehicle for the fault of the son of the complainant is not as per law.  Thus, this Commission finds indeed there was deficiency ofcourse in service and practice of unfair trade by the O.P here in this case.  Accordingly this issue goes in favour of the complainant.

Issues no.i & iii.

From the discussions as made above, the case of the complainant is maintainable and he is entitled to a reasonable extent of relief.  Hence it is so ordered;

 

                                                ORDER

The case is decreed on contest against the O.P.  The O.P is directed to release the vehicle belonging to the complainant in his favour forthwith.  But as regards to the facts and circumstances, no cost.  This order is to be carried out within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 21^st   day of   November,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.           

                                                                                                                                Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President

                       

                                                                                                                                                               Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                                               Member