ORDER

(Passed on  03/03/2020)

PER SHRI.ATUL D.ALSI, PRESIDENT.

The complainant has filed this complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer

Protection Act,1986 against refusal by OP to issue No Due Certificate eventhough the complainant is ready to repay the outstanding loan of Rs.27,755/-.

2.      The facts in short giving rise to this petition are that the complainant purchased a truck bearing No.AP 16 TY 5490 by obtaining finance of Rs.7,74,000/- from OP which was to be reapayed in 45 monthly installments of Rs.24,252/- each during the period 1/5/2015 to 1/1/2017. As per the statement issued by OP an amount of Rs.12,33,430/- was shown to be paid by the complainant. The complainant, thereafter paid Rs.30,000/- on 20/9/2018 and again Rs.30,000/- on 4/10/2018. Thus he has paid Rs.10,63,580/-towards repayment of loan. The complainant, thereafter time to time requested the OP to issue statement of loan accounts but the OP avoided to issue the same. Hence the complainant issued a legal notice to the OP and shown his willingness to pay the outstanding loan amount of Rs.27,755/- and requested to issue No Due Certificate. However, the OP demanded Rs.1,50,000/- and threatend to seize the vehicle by using muscle power. The complainant tried to report the matter to police but they avided to take action stating it to be a matter Civil in nature. Therefore the complainant has no other alternative but to file the present petition.

3.      The complaint is admitted and notice was served on the OP. The OP filed itsr reply and thereby denied allegations against it. The OP submitted that its services were availed by the complainant for commercial purpose as the truck was being used for commercial transportation and hence the Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

4.      The OP submitted that the there is outstanding loan amount of Rs.1,66,543/- excluding interest till 25/12/2018. Therefore, the complainant has filed this complaint with an ulterior motive of evading payment of dues. The OP had issued legal notice to the complainant for recovery of arrears and as he failed, had attempted to reposses the vehicle lawfully. However, the complainant removed the tyres of the truck. Therefore, the act of complainant amounts to illegality and the complaint, being false is liable to be dismissed with cost.

5.      Counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant has paid the instalments regularly and paid all the dues as per statement of accounts submitted to the OP, but the OP intentionally refused to correct the accounts of complainant and failed to issue statement regularly. The OP tried to seize the vehicle illegally. The complainant is ready and willing to deposit the balance amount of Rs.27,755/-. Therefore, the complainant has good case on merit and hence is liable to be allowed. He therefore, prayed for allowing the complaint as prayed.

6.        Counsel for the OPs argued that the transaction being commercial in nature, the Forum has no jurisdiction. He futher argued that the agreement of loan is binding on both the parties and as per rules and regulations penaulty for late payment and dishonour of cheques has been charged on loan amount. There is an outstanding loan amount of Rs.1,66,543/- excluding interest till 5/12/2018 and the complainant is using illegal tactics to avoid to pay the balance dues. Therefore, the petition has no merit and is liable to be dismissed with cost.  

7. We have gone through the complaint, written versions filed by OP, affidavit, documents and WNA filed by the parties. We have also heard the oral arguments advanced by parties.

                    Points                                                                           Finding

1. Whether the complainant is a Consumer ?                               Yes

2.  Whether  the Forum has jurisdiction to entertain the

  complaint ?                                                                                      Yes

3. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part

  of OP?                                                                                             Yes          

4. What order ?                                                                   As per final order..

As to issue No.1 & 2

8.      The complainant purchased a truck bearing No.AP 16 TY 5490 for earning his livelihood by obtaining finance of Rs.7,74,000/- from OP. There is no evidence on record to show that the complainant owns multiple trucks. Therefore, the finance service cannot be said to be availed by the complainant for commercial purpose. Hence the complainant is a Consumer within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of the C.P.Act.

9.        The OP has raised an objection that there is an arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties in case any dispute arises regarding the loan transaction. However, no such dispute is in fact adjudicated upon or has been referred to the Arbitrator by either of the parties. Therefore the jurisdiction of the Consumer Fora can not be ousted because U/s 3 of the C.P.Act, Consumer Fora has been vested with concurrent jurisdiction by enacting special legislation by the Parliament. Hence the Consumer Forum has jurisdiction to entertain the instant dispute. Hence the issue is decided accordingly.

As to issue No.3

10.        On perusal of the documents, the OP seems to have issued a notice to the complainant for recovery of arrears of loan amounting to Rs.1,66,543/. However, the OP failed to substantiate as to how it arrived at this quantum of amount by furnishing detailed statement of arrears of amount and the charges and penaulties levied thereupon. On the other hand, the complainant has admittedly repayed Rs.10,03,585/- till 19/9/2018 and further paid Rs.30,000/- on 20/9/2018 and Rs.30,000/- on 4/10/2018. Thus the complainant has repayed Rs.10,63,585/- as against the loan amount of Rs.7.74,000/- and is willing to deposit the balance amount of Rs.27,755/-. However, the op claimed Rs.1,66,543/- without specifying any details. Hence the complainant requested the OP from time to time to issue detailed statement of outstanding dues alongwith charges levied. But the OP failed to furnish the details to the complainant. It is pertinent to note that the OP has not furnished any such details on before the Forum also. The complainant has time to time submitted to the OP that outstanding dues are to the tune of Rs.27,755/- and he is ready and willing to deposit the same. However, the OP failed to accept that quantum or to substantiate its claim of Rs.1,66,543/- by providing detailed statement of arrears to the complainant. Therefore, non submission of detailed statement of accounts itself amounts to deficiency in service. Hence it would be justifiable to direct the complainant to deposit the balance amount of Rs.27,755/- as full and final settlement of claim and thereupon the OP shall release the original documents of the truck in question.

As to issue No.4

11. In view of our observations supra, we pass the following order..

Final order

1.  The Complaint is partly allowed.

    2. The complainant shall deposit the balance loan amount of   Rs.27,755/- with the OP and thereupon, the OP shall release the encumberance on the truck. It shall relase all the original documents of the truck in favour of complainant.

3. The OP shall pay a total amount of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as    

  compensation for mental agony and cost of the proceeding.

4.  Copy of the order be furnished to both the parties free of cost.

(Smt.Kalpana Jangade (Kute)  (Smt.Kirti Vaidya (Gadgil)     (Shri.Atul D.Alsi)

               Member                                 Member                                    President