Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/659/2018

Bhim Sain - Complainant(s)

Versus

Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

08 Jan 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/659/2018
Date of Institution	:	18/12/2018
Date of Decision	:	08/01/2019

 

Bhim Sain s/o late Shri Ganga Ram, resident of House No.8, Adarsh Nagar, Lohgarh, Near Old Police Station, Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar.

…..Complainant

V E R S U S­

Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Company Limited, SCO No.2423-2424, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh, through its Authorized Representative/Branch Manager.

……Opposite Parties

 

QUORUM:	RATTAN SINGH THAKUR	PRESIDENT
	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER

                                                               

ARGUED BY

:

Sh.B.S.Bisht, Counsel for Complainant alongwith Complainant in person.

PER RATTAN SINGH THAKUR, PRESIDENT

1.             Counsel for complainant vehemently argued in the pitch of his voice, allegations made and documents annexed with the complaint makes out a case for admission of the consumer complaint against the opposite party and the complaint may be admitted.

2.             We have gone through the allegations made in the complaint. The allegations made in the complaint are, complainant had raised a loan from the opposite party and loan amount was to be repaid in 14 years in monthly installments of Rs.24,980/-. The mode of repayment was ECS payment. ECS was defaulted. The installments were paid later on in cash and thereafter the opposite party has launched an arbitration proceedings against the complainant which the complainant was unable to attend at Kolkatta. Thereafter on award being passed, the same was got executed from executing court i.e. Court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge. Later on execution was dismissed in default. Perusal of the record further shows that opposite party had prosecuted the complainant in two complaints under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and in two cases complainant had been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment. Against the said orders, the appeals are pending. Not only this, another prosecution for criminal offence has also been launched. Per the complainant, the prosecution launched was malicious, therefore, it amounts to deficiency in service, unfair trade practice & mental and physical harassment.

3.             From the aforesaid allegations, we conclude, for all intents and purposes the complainant felt aggrieved and alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party as they had launched proceedings under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in which the complainant was prosecuted, tried, convicted and then sentenced to imprisonment. It is process of law which has been followed and remedy with the complainant is to raise such like arguments before the Hon’ble Appellate Court. In case we admit the complaint, it will open the pandora box and will amount to retrial which is not permissible in consumer dispute as these are summary cases.

4.             With filing of the complaints for criminal offence and then fair trial was held and complainant was convicted & sentenced, by any stretch of imagination it cannot be concluded, with such action there was deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party as the adjudicating body i.e. Court of Ld. J.M.I.C. has already convicted and sentenced the complainant. We are in full agreement with the contention raised as criminal and civil proceedings are separate, independent and distinct in nature. But the case has been arisen out of criminal proceedings and had the complainant been acquitted, he had cause of action to file suit for malicious prosecution, but in this case he was convicted which is not a deficiency in service or unfair trade practice. Not only this, arbitration in this case was done & award passed. Thus, now present consumer complaint is not maintainable as inconsistent orders are not permissible under the law. Hence, we find no merit in the complaint and proceed to dismiss the same at preliminary stage of admission.  

5.             The certified copy of this order be sent to the complainant free of charge. File after its due completion be consigned to record room.

		Sd/-	Sd/-
08/01/2019		[Surjeet Kaur]	[Rattan Singh Thakur]
		Member	President