Orissa

Cuttak

CC/159/2017

Shasikanta Panda - Complainant(s)

Versus

Indusind Bank Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

H K Tripathy

24 Jun 2019

ORDER

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

C.C No.159/2017

Sashikanta Panda,

At:Gopinathpur,PO:Singhnath Pitha,

PS:Baramba,Dist:Cuttack.                                                              .… Complainant.

 

Vrs.

1.         IndusInd  Bank Ltd.(Consumer Finance Division),

Bhubaneswar, represented through its

Authorized Signatory/State Head,

At:1^st Floor,Monarama Chambers,

Cuttack-Puri Road,P.O:Rasulgarh,

Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khurda.

 

2.      Branch Manager,

IndusInd Bank Ltd.(C.F.D),

At:Bajrakabati Road,Plot NO.1320,

Umang Plaza,2^nd Floor,PO:Buxibazar,

PS:Mangalabag,Town/Dist:Cuttack-753001.… Opp. Parties.

 

Present:               Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,President.

Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member (W).

 

Date of filing:    21.12.2017

Date of Order:  24.06.2019

 

For the complainant  :    Sri H.K.Tripathy,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps                 :   Sri P.K.Mishra,Adv. & Associates.

 

Smt. Sarmistha Nath,Member(W).

 

                The complainant being a consumer 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(Act in short) in terms of his prayer made in the complaint petition.  The allegation made in the complaint is with regard to deficiency in service provided and unfair trade practice adopted by the O.Ps.

1. The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant; an unemployed youth has purchased a vehicle (Bajaj RE Auto) financed by O.P No.1.  The O.P bank as financier earns profit and rendered services.  The relationship between complainant and O.Ps is contractual in nature and the O.P had to implement its various schemes but the O.P did not provide documents like (1) loan sanction order, (ii) Loan agreement (iii) Deed of hypothecation (iv) Any demand notice (v) seizure order if made and (vii) Delivery order of the property of loan object delivery of the documents.  The loan contract No. is OCC036738G.  The loan amount is Rs.1,45,000/- under E.M.I of Rs.5,140.47 at the rate of interest 13% with repayment commencing from 12.1.2016 till 07.12.2019.  Out of the total loan amount of the vehicle i.e. Rs.1,45,000/- complainant has paid Rs.1,28,703/- towards E.M.I to the financier.  In addition to the aforesaid amount, the complainant has invested towards accessories Rs.3000/- and tax and insurance of Rs.6,434/-.  The complainant has registered his vehicle with the R.T.O,Cuttack bearing Regd. No.OD-05-T-3510.  The total cost of the vehicle is more than the loan amount.  Complainant paid Rs.26,600/- as down payment.  The loan amount is Rs.1,45,000/- and interest is Rs.70,760/- and other charges is Rs.41,966/-.  After completion of formalities, the complainant was plying the vehicle and was regularly paying the loan dues as per the schedule.  Due to illness of the complainant, he could not pay Rs.26,000/- towards installment.  The O.P No.2 issued a notice to the complainant on 4.12.2017 which was received by the mother of the complainant on 16.12.17.  On the same day i.e. 16.12.17 the O.P bank suddenly seized the vehicle at about 3.50 P.M at Badambmadi,Cuttack without giving any notice prior to seizure of the vehicle  After the seizure of the vehicle the complainant met the O.P No.1 to know about the reason of seizure of the vehicle but the O.P No.1 told that since he has defaulted in payment of loan, his vehicle was seized and the O.Ps are authorized to seize the vehicle.  The complainant is regularly paying the monthly installments and only some amount has not been deposited.

Finding no other way, the complainant approached the O.Ps to release his vehicle since he has also invested in addition to the loan amount.But the O.Ps repudiated the request of the complainant and demanded money in order to release the vehicle.Due to the aforesaid conduct of the O.Ps, the complainant reasonably apprehends that his vehicle might have been sold to some other person for which the complainant will be suffered financial loss and loss in his livelihood.So the complainant has prayed for a direction to release the vehicle without payment of any amount, pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment, Rs.10,000/- towards the cost of litigation and Rs.25,000/- as compensation for unfair trade practice.In addition to it, the complainant has also filed a misc. case before this Forum and prayed to pass an interim order directing the O.Ps to hand over the said vehicle to the petitioner without charging any cost as there was no prior notice of seizure.

2. The O.Ps have appeared and filed their written version.  The O.Ps, in their written version have mentioned that the complainant does not fall within the definition of consumer and the relationship between the complainant and the O.Ps is that of borrower and the lender and as such no consumer dispute arises.  Besides that the issues raised by the complainant do not fall within the ambit and scope of C.P.Act.  The O.Ps have further stated that the complainant is guilty of suppression of material fact and malicious misrepresentation as he has never informed the Forum that he has defaulted in complying with his responsibilities and duties prescribed under the law and agreed by the loan agreement.  The further plea of the O.Ps is that the time is the essence of the contract and the installments are to be paid on or before the date.  But the complainant has defaulted in payment of 6 installments.  In spite of several letters issued by the O.Ps, the complainant did not pay any heed to repay the installments.  Copy of statement of accounts, intimation letters and letter dt.7.10.17 are attached as Annexure-A,B & C series respectively  The vehicle has been released in favour of the complainant on 26.12.17.  The release order and acknowledgement annexed as Annexure-D series and the documents have been supplied to the complainant.  Apart from the above, there is arbitration clause in the agreement.
3. We have heard the learned counsels of both the parties at length and gone through the averments and documents filed by the respective parties.  Admittedly the complainant availed the loan from the O.Ps and defaulted in payment of installments.  The complainant has not controverted the averments of the O.Ps that the vehicle has been released in his favour on 26.12.17 and the complainant has also acknowledged the same vide Annexure-D series.  The complainant has not disclosed the above facts which show the conduct of the complainant that he has not approached this Forum with clean hands and suppressed material facts.  So he is not entitled to any relief as prayed for.

ORDER

                                                The complaint is devoid of any merit and dismissed.

 

                Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble Member in the Open Court on this the 24^th day of June,2019  under the seal and signature of this Forum.

 

  ( Smt. Sarmistha Nath )

                       Member (W)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              (Sri D.C.Barik)

                                                                                                         President.