Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/277/2013

K.Chellapappa - Complainant(s)

Versus

Indus Ind Bank - Opp.Party(s)

V Yurendra Kumar

24 Nov 2021

ORDER

                                                                                                                                                            Date of Complaint Filed: 10.09.2013

                                                                                                                                                            Date of Reservation: 03.11.2021

                                                                                                                                                            Date of Order: 24.11.2021

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH)

 

Present:

 

          Thiru. R.V.R. Deenadayalan, B.A., B.L.              : President

          Thiru. T. Vinodh Kumar, B.A., B.L.                    : Member

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.277/2013

 

WEDNESDAY, THE 24^THDAY OF NOVEMBER 2021

 

K. Chellapappa,

W/o. Mr. M. Kaliyappan,

No.148, MuthuMariammanKoil Street,

Saidapet,

Chennai – 600 015.                                                   .. Complainant.                                                    ..Versus..

 

 

1. Indus Ind Bank,

By its Head Consumer Finance Division,

Old No.115, 116, New No.34, G.N. Chetty Road,

T. Nagar,

Chennai – 600 017.

 

2. M/s. Indus Marketing & Financial Services Pvt. Ltd.,

By its Manager (Service Provider),

“Priyanka Towers”,

No.2, Mangadu Road,

Sri Ranga Nagar,

Moulivakkam,

Chennai – 600 125.                                          ..  Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the complainant        : M/s. V. Yurendrakumar

Counsel for the opposite parties   : M/s. K. Moorthy

 

        On perusal of records and after having heard the oral arguments of the complainant’s Counsel and having treated the written arguments of Opposite parties as their oral arguments we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by the President Thiru. R.V.R. Deenadayalan, B.A., B.L.

1.     The complainant has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, prays to return the APE City LPG 3 passenger Auto bearing Regn. No.TN 09 BF 0826 without any demur or demand, to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation and damages for the deficiency in service of the opposite parties in having vehicle and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and pain caused by such deficiency in service along with cost of Rs.15,000/- to the complainant.

 

2.     The complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit but not filed written argument.   On the side of the complainant, documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A3             were marked.   The opposite parties have submitted their proof affidavit, filed written argument and on the side of the opposite parties documents Ex.B1 to Ex.B6 were marked. 

3.The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant entered into a Hire Purchase Loan Agreement with the 1^st opposite party bank for purchase of APE City LPG 3 passenger Auto dated:23.09.2010.  The 2^nd opposite party sanctioned a loan amount of Rs.1,20,000/- and the same shall be repayable at monthly instalment of Rs.5,142/- for 20 months and Rs.4,842/- for 16 months  The complainant was regular in payment of EMI for loan taken and he has paid up to Rs.1,42,412/-.  While so on 07.11.2012, one Mr.Ponnurangam of the opposite party concern with four others contacted the complainant and sought for inspection of his vehicle.  Believing the words, the complainant gave the keys of the vehicle and other related documents to them.  Thus, personally assured to return the vehicle after inspection shortly.  But they have not returned the vehicle as promised.   Then on enquiry, the 1^st opposite party has told that a vehicle had repossessed for non-payment of EMI.  Further, it is informed that the vehicle had been sold in auction for Rs.35,000/- and the complainant had to pay the balance arrears amount of Rs.35,000/-.  The complainant’s queries as to details of auction, name of purchaser and other related details leading to the auction and its connected affairs remained unanswered.  They have not even given the proper statement of accounts of payment.  Hence, this complaint is filed.

4.Written version of the 1^st opposite party and adopted by the 2^nd opposite party:

It is admitted that the complainant availed loan for a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- and entered into a Hire Purchase Agreement.  The total agreement value is of Rs.1,75,500/- and the amount is payable in 36 instalments in which, Rs.5,142/- for 20 months and Rs.4,842/- for the remaining 16 months.  The complainant was irregular and delay in payment due.  The complainant also denied that one Mr.Ponnurangam and 4 others of the opposite party approached the complainant for inspection of the vehicle.  The 1^st opposite party had sent several reminders and letters to the complainant to pay an overdue amount to avoid legal action against the non-payment of the due amount. Even though after all the reminder letters and telegrams by the 1^st opposite party there was not even a single reply from the complainant which made the 1^st opposite party to repossess the vehicle and initiate the auction process of the vehicle.   A letter was also sent to the complainant about the auction of the vehicle and even time was also given to the complainant to pay the overdue amount.  Since all the efforts of the 1^st opposite party went in vein, there was no sign of reply from the complainant and finally the vehicle was auctioned for a maximum amount of Rs.35,000/- and yet there is no pending amount to be paid by the complainant to compensate the loss made.  It is submitted that the agreement between the complainant and opposite party is arbitration clause in which, both are agreed to resolve all and any dispute through Arbitration  and the opposite party already initiated Arbitration before Sole Arbitrator, Mr. T. Venugopal and the same is pending for disposal.  Only after receiving notice the Arbitration proceedings, the complainant has filed this present complaint.  Hence, the complaint is not maintainable and requested to dismiss the same.

5.The points for consideration are:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get reliefs as claimed in the complaint?
3. To what relief, the complaint is entitled?

 

6.Point No.1:-

It is an admitted fact that the complainant availed a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- towards Hire Purchase Loan Agreement.  According to the complainant he has paid the instalments due very prompt.  To prove the same the complainant has not submitted any document.  The complainant submitted Ex.A1 which is a notice sent to the opposite party through his Counsel dated:29.12.2012.  In the notice the complainant has given the payment details.  The above payment details does not reveal that the complainant is not very prompt in repayment of instalments due.  Ex.B1 is the reminder letter dated:05.10.2012.  In this letter, the opposite party called upon the complainant to pay a sum of Rs.19,245/- towards the overdue amount and also, it is informed that if the complainant failed to pay  the above amount that the opposite party would be constrained to initiate proper legal auction and treating that the above Loan Agreement as Terminated.  Ex.A1 would not reveal that the complainant has paid the due amount after 30.09.2012.   Therefore, it is presumed after Ex.B1 notice, the complainant has not paid the demand amount.  Ex.B2 is the notice dated:30.10.2012 not only to the complainant but also has Guarantor A. Chinnaiyan.  In the notice, it is mentioned that due to continuous default in payment of monthly instalments the bank has reposed the vehicle on 30.10.2012 and the statement of account maintained by the bank shows that the complainant  is liable to pay a sum of Rs.70,788/- as on 06.11.2012 towards full and final settlement and also called upon to pay the above amount within 7 days from the date of receipt of the notice, failing which, the opposite parties are constrained to sell the vehicle as per the terms and conditions contained in the Loan Agreement without further notice and realize the outstanding due amount.  Ex.B3 is the telegram copy sent to the complainant and demanded to clear the loan amount on or before 08.10.2012.  Therefore the above document would reveal that the complainant is not in regular in payment of instalments as agreed in  the Loan Agreement and also the complainant has to pay the balance amount to the opposite parties.  Since the complainant failed to pay the balance due amount, the opposite party has repossessed the vehicle and sold in auction after giving due notice.  Apart from that, for the balance amount the opposite party has appointed the Sole Arbitrator, Mr. T. Venugopal, who passed Arbitration award on 29.05.2015.   Therefore on perusal of records, it is found that the opposite party has taken due steps to recover his due amount according to law.  The complainant has failed to pay the due amount to the opposite party and he is a defaulter.  Therefore, we found that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  Accordingly, point No.1 is answered.

7.Point Nos.2 & 3:-

We have discussed and decided that the opposite parties have not committed any deficiency in service.  Hence, the complainant is not entitled to get any reliefs as claimed in the complaint.  Accordingly, point Nos.2 & 3 are answered.

In the result, this complaint is dismissed.  No costs.

      Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on this the 24^thday of November  2021.

 

 

 

 

T.VINODH KUMAR                                     R.V.R.DEENADAYALAN                                                                                        

    MEMBER                                                     PRESIDENT

 

List of documents filed on the side of the complainant:

 

Ex.A1	29.12.2012	Copy of legal notice with acknowledgement
Ex.A2	05.01.2013	Copy of reply
Ex.A3	15.02.2013	Copy of re-joinder

 

List of documents filed on the side of the opposite parties:-

 

Ex.B1	05.10.2012	Copy of remainder letter
Ex.B2	30.10.2012	Copy of Auction notice
Ex.B3		Copy of telegram
Ex.B4	05.01.2013	Copy of complainant’s legal notice
Ex.B5	29.05.2015	Copy of Arbitration award
Ex.B6		Copy of Statement of accounts

 

 

 

T. VINODH KUMAR                                        R.V.R.DEENADAYALAN                                                                                       

MEMBER                                                                     PRESIDENT