Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

A/19/59

L&T HOUSING FINANCE LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

GANGA SINGH THAKUR - Opp.Party(s)

SH. SUNIL PANDEY

05 Apr 2022

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

                              

                                    FIRST APPEAL NO. 59 OF 2019

(Arising out of order dated 30.11.2018 passed in C.C.No.748/2017by the District Commission, Jabalpur-2)

 

L & T HOUSING FINANCE LTD & ANOTHER.                                                 …          APPELLANT

 

Versus

                  

GANGA SINGH THAKUR.                                                                                 …         RESPONDENT.

 

BEFORE:

 

                  HON’BLE DR. (MRS) MONIKA MALIK    :      PRESIDING MEMBER

                 

 

                                      O R D E R

05.04.2022

 

          Shri Sunil Pandey, learned counsel for the appellants.

            Ms. Kalpana Verma, learned counsel for the respondent with Devendra Singh Thakur son of respondent.

           

 

As per Dr. Monika Malik :            

                         This appeal filed by the appellants/opposite parties is directed against the order dated 30.11.2018 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jabalpur-2 (For short ‘District Commission) in C.C.No.748/2017, whereby the District Commission has partly allowed the complaint filed by the complainant/respondent and it is directed to the opposite parties/appellants to provide orginal documents to the complainant which were obtained from him at the time of obtaining the loan.  In addition a sum of Rs.50,000/- as amount charged extra from the complainant is directed to be awarded to the complainant with interest @

 

-2-

6% p.a. Compensation of Rs.5,000/- along with costs of Rs.2,000/- is also been awarded to the complainant.

2.                Heard.

3.                Challenging the aforesaid order, learned counsel for appellants argued that the complainant/respondent had not incorporated the appellants’ branch office as opposite party before the District Commission.  It is argued that the complainant had impleaded L & T Housing Finance Limited, Jabalpur as opposite party no.2 before the District Commission, whereas the appellants have no branch office at Jabalpur.  The appellants have branch office at Indore.  The complainant/respondent had approached the appellants’ Indore branch office, regarding obtaining the loan amount.  The complainant was very well aware of this fact but still he did not incorporate the Indore branch office as opposite party in the complaint. Therefore the notice sent by the District Commission to the Jabalpur office was not received by them, which is evident from the envelope, bearing an endorsement ‘unclaimed’.

4.                On careful perusal of the record of the District Commission and after hearing arguments advanced by counsel for parties, it is observed that the recovery notice dated 14.12.2015 & 15.12.2016, clearly mention the issuing authority as L&T Housing Finance Ltd., Mumbai having a branch office at RNT Marg, Indore.  Clearly, the Indore branch of appellant finance

-3-

company in not incorporated as opposite party before the District Commission.  Also the notice addressing Jabalpur branch office is received back as ‘unclaimed’. Now since the appellants have no branch office at Jabalpur as it has been categorically stated by learned counsel for appellants, the Indore branch office deserves to be incorporated as one of the opposite party in the complaint.

5.                In view of the aforesaid, the impugned order is set-aside and the case is remanded back the case to the District Commission for deciding it afresh on merits, in accordance with law after necessary amendment in the complaint.

6.                Parties are directed to appear before the District Commission on 20.05.2022.

7.                Record of the District Commission be sent at the earliest.

8.                The District Commission is directed to proceed in the matter in accordance with law.

9.                Appellants deserve opportunity to file reply before the District Commission. Since it is admitted by the counsel for the appellants that the appellants have received copy of complaint along with accompanying documents, it is directed that the appellants shall file reply to the complaint on the date of appearance before the District Commission.

 

-4-

10.              With the observations and directions as aforesaid, this appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs.

 

                                                                               (Dr. Monika Malik)                          

                                                                                Presiding Member