PER SHRI S.M.SHEMBOLE, HON’BLE PRESIDING MEMBER.

            Challenge in this appeal is the judgment and order dated 18/12/2006 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Yavatmal in Consumer Complaint No. 147/2006 partly allowing the complaint and directing the appellant/original opponent No. 2 and 3 ICICI Bank to consider the sale price of tractor as Rs.2,16,000/- and same amount be appropriated with the dues outstanding against loan account of respondents / complainants, etc.

            Brief facts giving rise to the appeal are that,

            Respondents / complainants had barrowed loan Rs.3,12,902/- from appellant - ICICI Bank Ltd., for purchasing a tractor and purchased a tractor through dealer opponent No. 1 - Elite Automobile,  who is exonerated from the complaint and not made a party to this appeal. It was agreed by the respondents / complainants to repay the loan in 36 months by way installment of Rs.4,000/- for five months and Rs.47,500/- for the sixth month till the end of tenure. However, they failed to repay the loan amount. On 1st Nov., 2003 an amount of Rs.67,500/- was due against loan amount of respondents. Therefore, on 18/12/2004 the appellant - bank terminated the loan agreement demanded the dues. On the same day the appellant took the possession of the vehicle.

            Thereafter Pre Sale Notice dated 24/01/2005 was served on the respondents / complainants but they did not comply the notice by making payment of dues. Therefore on dated 19/09/2005 the tractor came to be sold in auction for Rs.1,00,000/-. Mr. Vasant Pande who is opponent No.4 in original complaint, has purchased the said vehicle in auction. Therefore, he is exonerated and not made party to this appeal. On selling the tractor in auction at the price of Rs.1,00,000/-, this sale proceeds are credited to the loan account of respondents / complainants on the same day. Thereafter, an amount of Rs.2,63,029/- remained due. Therefore, on the same date i.e.19/09/2005 appellant - bank issued Post Sale Notice to the complainant and demanded dues Rs.2,63,029/- but they did not comply the notice.

            Thereafter on 25/04/2006 the complainant filed complaint before District Consumer Forum, Yavatmal, alleging that appellant - bank has illegally seized the vehicle and claimed the possession of vehicle or refund the amount of Rs.1,10,000/- to the complainant.

            The complaint was resisted by the appellant - bank and submitted that the bank has legally seized and sold the vehicle as the complainants / respondents are defaulters in payment of amount, etc.

            On hearing both sides, District Consumer Forum, Yavatmal partly allowed the complaint and directed the appellant - bank to consider the price of vehicle as Rs.2,16,000/- and same amount be appropriated with the dues outstanding against loan account of respondents / complainants and further on appropriating the said amount  if dues remains outstanding against loan account of the complainants it should be recovered by them, etc. Moreover, the District Consumer Forum also awarded  compensat Rs.5,000/- for mental harassment and Rs.1,000/- as cost of proceeding.

            Feeling aggrieved by the said impugned judgment and order, the opponent - bank came to this Commission in the appeal.

            Appeal notice was send by RPAD to the respondents but though the respondents were duly served with notice, they did not appear. Postal acknowledgements are also on record. Therefore, appeal is proceeded ex-party.

            We heard Mr. Vora, learned counsel for appellant - bank and perused the copy of impugned judgment & order, copy of complaint and the documents i.e. loan agreement documents.

            Mr. Vora, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that without any evidence led by the complainants / respondents, the Ld. Members of the District Consumer Forum have wrongly held that the price of the vehicle, in question, would have been Rs.2,16,000/- but it was  auctioned for Rs.1,00,000/- only. He has further submitted that the appellant bank has legally sold the vehicle by following due procedure i.e. giving notice in advance for public auction and by accepting high bid by the respondent No.4 the vehicle was legally sold to him at Rs.1,00,000-. On perusal of record, specifically copy of the impugned judgment & order, we find much force in the submission of learned counsel for the appellant.

            The record does not reflect that there is any evidence indicating the price of the vehicle, in question, on relevant date of auction was at Rs.2,16,000/-. Thus, the finding of the District Consumer Forum, Yavatmal is being invented and cannot be sustained.

            In the result, the appeal deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following order:-

ORDER

1.         The appeal is allowed and impugned judgment and order      passed by the District Consumer Forum, Yavatmal is set aside.

2.         No order as to cost.

3.         Copy of this order be supplied to the parties.