Per NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER

   The complainant entered into a loan cum hypothecation agreement no. LVDEL00007237412 with ICICI Bank Ltd property  for the purchase of vehicle TATA 2515 Registration no. HR 38 F 8915.  The complainant failed to pay some EMI’s of the loan amount. He has pleaded that he made the payment of defaulted EMIs with interest and penalty.  Still , on 4-9-2007 , the muscleman of the bank hijacked the vehicle when it was plying on National Highway 25 at Chapprola , Distt. Ghaziabad, UP.  The forcable possession of the vehicle by the bank caused deficiency in service.  Legal notice was issued but without any remedial measure. Hence, this complaint.

            The OP has contested the complaint and has filed a written statement.

            Para 7 of the reply by the OP is relevant for the purpose of the decision of this case and is  reproduced as under:-

7. That there is no deficiency on the part of the OP in as much as the legal procedure has been duly complied  before taking the peaceful possession of the financed vehicle bearing registration no. HR 38 F 8915.  It is pertinent to mention here that the amount financed was Rs. 4,08,000/- which was re-payable in 35 EMIs  of Rs. 14,364/- each carrying interest @ 14.5 % p.a. and payable from 05.8.2006 to 05.6.2009. Even the very first EMI of August 2006 got bounced. Similarly EMI for the subsequent months also get bounced.  The complaianant did not bother to pay the EMIs despite the fact that a huge amount of loan had been availed by him.   The complainant himself deliberately and mischievously did not make the payment of the EMIs to the OP on time, and the account of the complainant became highly irregular.    The loan  facilities granted to the complainant was misused by the complainant, and despite the written and oral undertakings given by the complainant, the payments of the outstanding amount was not made to the OP.  The sale notices etc, were issued to the complainant , but to no avail.

            The OP bank has claimed that the complainant has not approached this forum with clean    hands and , therefore, no relief whatsoever can be granted to the complainant.

            Both the parties have filed their evidence by way of affidavits.

            The parties have also filed additional affidavits to prove their case.  

            We have heard arguments advanced at the bar and have perused the record.

            The counsel  for the OP has contended that the possession of the alleged vehicle has been taken after complying with the legal formalities.  He has further contended that even the first EMI falling in Aug 2006 had got bounced and similarly the EMI of subsequent month of Sept, Oct, and Noc, also  get bounced.   Despite of the written and oral undertaking given by the complainant the complainant failed to pay the outstanding amount to the OP.  It is further contended  by the counsel for the OP that EMI demand notices, loan recall notices, pre-sale and post sale notices etc were issued to the complainant but all in vain.  It is contended that the OP has acted within the four comes of law and has not done any illegal act, and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint, as the same is devoid of merits.

            We , however, are in agreement with the counsel for the OP.  The complainant had himself admitted in his complaint that he had not paid EMIs on time.   Timely payment of EMIs was the essence of the contract between the parties.  By the non payment of the EMIs, the complainant has himself violated the terms of contract, and as such is liable for the consequence.

            The learned counsel for the OP has  placed on record the copy of the EMI, demand notice, loan recall notice , pre-sale and post sale notices, chart showing  outstanding amount of loan on 5-02-2007 as well as receipts of the payment made by the complainant.  The perusal of the same shows that since beginning, the complainant is a defaulter, he had not paid single EMI on time, and further failed to pay the outstanding amount of loan.

            We are, therefore, of the opinion that the  act of the  OP was justified and there is no deficiency in services on their part as alleged by the complainant.  We, therefore, find no merit in the complaint and the same is hereby dismissed.

Copy of the order be made available to the parties as per rule. 

    File be consigned to record room.

    Announced in open sitting of the Forum on.....................