The titled complainant has filed the present complaint through his (Ex.C1) S.P.A. (Special Power of Attorney) Holder seeking the appropriate cum requisite relief(s) against the titled opposite party Bank at non-issuance of 'No Dues Certificate cum Transfer Letter on RTA Form 35' upon liquidation of the related Truck Loan vide the regular EMI s (Equated Monthly Installments) causing him much harassment, agony and financial.
2. The OP Bank on 14.02.2007 had financed the complainant owned Truck- Trailer - RC No. PB-06G- 5959 repayable by 07.01.2011 through E.M.I.s (Ex.C2 to Ex.C27) that however was repaid, in full, as on 21.12.2010 and the complainant was issued an 'unsigned no dues letter' (Ex.C28) on 11.03.2014 that however was not accepted by the RTA who had refused to vacate the OP financier-bank's lien from the said Truck-Trailer. Upon approach, the OP Bank straightaway refused to issue the requisite NDC + RTA Form 35, on the pretext that the complainant has been the co-borrower in another Truck-Trailer Loan. The complainant has addressed the OP 's said act as deficiency in service cum unfair trade practices on the part of the OP Bank and has also stated that it has adversely affected his credibility in the market causing him much humiliation, harassment and agony besides the financial loss for none of his fault and has since filed the instant/present complaint along with his affidavits (Ex.CW1/A & CW2/A) and the exhibited documents (Ex.C1 to Ex.C28) + written arguments seeking issuance of the NDC + RTA Form No.35 besides Rs.50,000/- as compensation with interest @ 18% PA with effect from the date of loan-liquidation (21.12.2010) till realization besides an amount of Rs.20,000/- as cost of the present litigation, all in the interest of justice.
3. The OP Bank upon summoning, appeared through their counsel and filed the written statement comprising of the preliminary as well as other objections (on merits) as: The present complaint is not maintainable in the present form as the complainant has not been their consumer and no cause of action had ever arisen in his favor and the complained-of transaction has been bound by the arbitration clause and thus the commission lacks the necessary adjudicatory jurisdiction to put the same on trial. Further, the complaint is bad for non-joining of the necessary parties as the herein complainant has been co-borrower in another Truck-Trailer Loan account and is es-topped by his own act and conduct as he has suppressed the material cum vital facts and has thus not come to the commission with clean hands. On merits, the OP Bank has accepted the paras 1 to 3 as matter of records but have specifically denied the ones contrary to the records. Further, the OP Bank has denied the contents of para 4 to 9 as wrong with the exception of having admitted liquidation of the Truck-Trailer Loan A/c but have pleaded that the complainant has been co-borrower in the other Truck-Trailer Loan A/c having a current outstanding of Rs.2,21,551/- plus interest and thus NDC + RTA Form 35 cannot be issued till liquidation of this loan account. Lastly, the OP Bank has alleged that the complainant had never approached them for issuance of the complained against NDC + RTA Form 35 etc and thus the present complaint deserves dismissal with costs. The OP Bank written reply/pleadings are accompanied by the Branch Manager Neeraj Gautam's affidavit Ex.OP1 and the documents namely: OP Bank S.P.A. favoring its Branch Manager; and statements of the two-loan accounts exhibited here as: Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP4, placed in evidence.
4. Moreover, the learned counsels for both the sides have also quoted/filed the Senior Court Judgments on the herein subject matter and these shall be respectfully perused for guidance as and when and wheresoever found necessary and relevant, as well.
5. We also observe that the present litigants have not filed their mandatory written arguments in spite of having availed of an ample number of adjournments and have finally requested for adjudication on the strength of their written versions/reply and oral-arguments taken, together.
6. We have examined the available documents/evidence as available on records of the present proceedings so as to statutorily interpret the meaning n purpose of each document along with the scope of adverse inference on account of some documents ignored to be produced/not produced by the contesting litigants against the back-drop of the allegations/arguments as put forth by learned counsels for their respective sides.
7. We have scrutinized the present complaint to examine the extant issues liable/probable to arise/prompt during the related proceedings and find these quite normal and fit for usual resolve through the herein prescribed summary procedure and thus we over-rule the OP Bank's preliminary objection of fraud/commercial purpose and continue with the requisite furtherance.
8. We observe that the OP Bank's pleadings/objections fails at the very face of the herein produced documents as the related Truck-Trailer loan stands liquidated and it is not the case of the OP Bank that the other Loan (with the present complainant as co-borrower) has turned Bad/NPA (Non Performing Asset) and the RTA Form 35 in the herein liquidated loan A/c. The senior court judgments as quoted by the OP Bank invariably pertain to NPA turned/bad debts and shall not benefit its pleadings/arguments.
9. On the other hand, the complainant has successfully proved his pleadings as well as all his allegations by virtue of the cogently relevant documents, produced in evidence and as such rightfully deserves the herein sought reliefs with moderation, of course. We find that the OP Bank has exhibited an employ of unfair trade practices in its functioning cum unscrupulous exploitation of the consumer/complainant and that do prove 'deficiency in service' in full display, on their part.
10. In the light of the all above, we are of the considered opinion that the herein OP Bank can neither escape nor wriggle out of its liability for the acts/omissions of its officials who have been instrumental in infringing the complainant's consumer rights and thus we partly allow this complaint and ORDER the OP Bank to issue the No Dues Certificate cum RTA Form 35, in right order, to the complainant besides paying him Rs.20,000/- as compensation with interest @ 6% P.A. with effect from the date of the loan-liquidation (21.12.2010) till realization along with a sum of Rs.5,000/- as cost of litigation and for having caused/inflicted harassment, mental agony and financial-loss within 45 days of receipt of certified copy of these orders otherwise the awarded amounts shall attract an additional interest @ 3% PA from the date of filing of the complaint till paid, in full.
11. The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.
12. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record.
(Naveen Puri)
President.
ANNOUNCED: (B.S.Matharu)
DEC. 15, 2022. Member.
YP.
