Orissa

Cuttak

CC/39/2019

Amita Das - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC Bank Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

B M Mohapatra

16 Nov 2020

ORDER

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

C.C No.39/2019

Amita Das,

W/O:Radhasyam Das,

At:Santiua,P.O:Jaleswar,

P.S:Jaleswar,Dist:Balesore.                                                            .… Complainant.

 

Vrs.

1.        Managing Director,HDFC Bank Ltd.,.

253P,Nariman Street,Mumbai,

                 Maharastra-400001.

2.        Branch Manager,

HDFC Bank Ltd.,

At:Fakirmohan Golei,PO/Disdt:Balasore.

 

3.         Branch Office,

HDFC Bank Ltd.,

At-Jholasahi,PO:Buxibazar,

Town/Dist:Cuttack

4.        R.T.O,Balasore, Dist-Balasore.

5.        ELECTRONICS Stockyard,At- Pahala,Bhubaneswar,Dist-Cuttack

 

Present:               Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,President.

Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member (W).

 

Date of filing:    25.03.2019

Date of Order:  16.11.2020

 

For the complainant  :    Sri B.M.Mohapatra,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps. 1,2& 3   :   Sri M.K.Panda,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps.4 & 5      :        None.              

 

 

Smt. Sarmistha Nath,Member(W).

 

                The complainant has filed this complaint before this Forum against the O.Ps for redressal of his grievances U/S-12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 in terms of her prayer made in the complaint petition  alleging deficiency in service provided and unfair trade practice adopted by the O.Ps.

1. The facts of the complainant’s case in brief is that the complainant is an unemployed person and to earn her livelihood she purchased a vehicle being financed by the O.Ps who have financed to the petitioner on petitioner’s application of loan and by a loan sanction order of the O.P No.1 through O.P.No.2.  The O.P bank as the financier earns profit and renders services to the petitioner as consumer.  The relationship between the petitioner and O.Ps is contractual.

The financier as the party on first part in the contractual relationship with the complainant was to implement its various scheme of loans but the O.Ps did not provide the documents like (1) loan sanction order, (ii) loan agreement (iii) deed of hypothecation,(iv)any demand notice(s) when served on the petitioner,(v) seizure order if made and (vii) delivery order of the property of loan object.But instead of supplying the aforesaid documents executed vide the loan agreement no.38309273, the O.Ps fixed the E.M.I of Rs.13,000/- x 47 without intimating about the rate of interest with repayment starting from March,2016 till April,2020.The complainant paid near about 28 E.M.Is of Rs.3,78,000/- to the O.P No.1 through O.P No.2 and complainant paid Rs.60,000/- for insurance and road tax.Out of the total loan amount of Rs.4,85,000/-, the complainant has paid near about Rs.4,86,000/-.In addition to the aforesaid amount, the complainant has invested aRs.50,000/- towards road tax, fitness and Rs.40,000/- for insurance.The complainant has registered his vehicle with the R.T.O,Balesore bearing Regd. No.OR-01-S-0313.R.C.Book is Annexure-1.

After the registration of the vehicle, the complainant was plying the vehicle all over Odisha and was regularly paying the loan dues as per the schedule but some installments are defaulted due to accident of the vehicle.Complainant verbally approached to O.P.2 and O.P.2 gave permission for plying the vehicle when the O.P No.3 Bank suddenly seized the vehicle on 18.3.2019 at about 8.30 A.M. at Manguli Chhack,Cuttack.The O.P No.3 without any seizure notice suddenly seized the vehicle of the complainant and parked it at his own place at Pahala Godown of O.PNo.5.Copy of the seizure list is Annexure-2.

After seizure of the vehicle, the complainant approached O.P No.2 & 3 to know about the reason of seizure and the O.P No.2 told that since she was in default of payment of loan amount, her vehicle was seized and the O.Ps are authorized to seize the vehicle.The O.P No.2 told the complainant that if she deposits the total outstanding amount, the vehicle will be released.The complainant approached the O.Ps to release here vehicle since she has made her own investment in addition to the loan amount but the O.P told the complainant that the vehicle will be released only after discussion.The complainant is in doubt that her vehicle might have been sold to some other person for which she will suffer financial loss.Till today the O.P has not released the vehicle.The complainant is ready to take back the vehicle by giving the defaulted amount of Rs.25,000/- and by letter dt.23.9.2019 the complainant asked the O.P to supply statement of account but of no avail.

The complainant has prayed before this Forum to direct the O.Ps to release the vehicle without any other charges or if the O.Ps will not be able to release the vehicle, refund the cost of the vehicle along with Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental agony, Rs.15,000/- for loss of social prestige and Rs.35,000/- as compensation for unfair trade practice.

2. The O.ps though appeared through their counsel but did not file written version and were set exparte.
3. We have heard from the learned counsel of the complainant and gone through the case record and documents and found that the complainant has purchased the vehicle being financed by O.Ps and defaulted in payment of some E.M.Is and the financier seized the vehicle.

During course of hearing the learned counsel for the complainant submitted that though the complainant has failed to pay a few E.M.Is, the financier has no right and authority to repossess the vehicle forcibly and without any prior information.On consideration of uncontroverted averments made by the complainant on oath together with the enclosures filed by the complainant, it is held that forcible repossession/seizure without any prior information to the complainant amounts to unfair trade practice on the part of O.Ps.O.Ps are jointly and severally liable.

                                                                                ORDER

The prayer of the complainant is allowed exparte against the O.Ps.The O.Ps are directed to release the vehicle (Scorpio) bearing Registration No.OR-01S-0313 and pay Rs.25,000/- towards compensation and Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble Member in the Open Court on this the 16^th day of November,2020 under the seal and signature of this Commission.

 

(Smt. Sarmistha Nath)

Member.

 

(Sri D.C Barik)

President