| Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PATIALA. Consumer Complaint No. 9 of 9.1.2019 Decided on: 1.10.2020 Jaswinder Singh son of Shingara Singh, resident of village Gheora ,Tehsil Samana, District Patiala. …………...Complainant Versus Indusind Consumer Finance Division, Khanda Chowk, Near Gurdawara Dukhniwaran Sahib, Patiala through its Manager. …………Opposite Party Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. QUORUM Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President Sh.Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member ARGUED BY Sh.Asheen Khan,counsel for complainant. OP ex-parte. ORDER JASJIT SINGH BHINDER,PRESIDENT - This is the complaint filed by Jaswinder Singh (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against Indusind Consumer Finance Division (hereinafter referred to as the OP.
- The brief facts of the case are that in the month of February,2016, the complainant availed loan of Rs.12,50,000/-from the OP for purchasing Truck/tralla bearing No. PB-10-CU-7402.The said loan was to be repaid by way of paying monthly installment of Rs.40,500/- w.e.f.22.3.2016. The complainant paid the amount of installment regularly till May,2018.
- It is averred that the complainant got the said vehicle insured by paying the amount from his own pocket but the official of the OP without disclosing anything to him also got the said vehicle insured with its own insurance company and on raising the demand of receipt of the insurance policy and premium, no document was supplied to the complainant.
- It is further averred that in the year 2017, the above said vehicle met with an accident and inspite of that the complainant regularly deposited monthly installment but after May,2018, due to some domestic and financial problem, he could not deposit the amount of installment. It is averred that in the last week of September,2018, the employees of the OP took the possession of the said vehicle and since then the same is retained with it.
- It is further averred that after taking custody/possession/impounding of the said vehicle, he has been regularly approaching and requesting the official of the OP for the release of the said vehicle. He also showed his willingness to deposit the defaulted amount but he was forced to deposit the entire amount at once. Legal notice dated 20.12.2018 was also got sent by the complainant but to no effect. There is thus deficient in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.
- It is further averred that due to impounding of the said vehicle, the complainant is unable to earn anything and is suffering from huge loss and is also suffering from mentally, physically and monetary. Hence this complaint with the prayer for giving direction to the OP to release the said vehicle with further direction not to sell and dispose off the same in any manner whatsoever and not to change its condition; to pay Rs.1,00,000/- for causing mental agony, harassment, unfair trade practice and also to pay Rs.2,00,000/-on account of loss of earning alongwith interest @18% per annum from the date of possessing the said vehicle till date of release of the vehicle.
- Notice of the complaint was duly served upon the OP but it failed to come present and to contest the case. Accordingly OP was proceeded ex-parte.
- In ex-parte evidence, the ld. counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant alongwith documents i.e. Ex.C1 copy of RC of the vehicle, Ex.C2 to Ex.C7 copies of receipts of installments, Ex.C8 copy of legal notice, Ex.C9 original postal receipt, Ex.C10 copy of receipt of installment and closed the evidence.
- We have heard the ld. counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
- The ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant availed the loan of Rs.12,50,000/- from the OP for the purchase of Truck/tralla. The ld. counsel for the complainant has further argued that the said loan was repayable in monthly installment of Rs.40,500/- w.e.f.22.3.2016. The ld. counsel for the complainant has further argued that the complainant had been paying the loan installments regularly. The ld. counsel for the complainant has further argued that in 2017, the said vehicle met with an accident but the complainant continued to pay the installments till 2018 but after that due to some domestic and financial problem he could not deposit the installment. It is further argued that the OP took the possession and is lying with the bank and prayed that the complaint be allowed.
- In support of the complaint, the complainant tendered his affidavit,Ex.CA alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C10. Ex.C1 is the copy of registration of the truck, Exs.C3 to C7 are the receipts of making the payment of installments to the bank,Ex.C8 is the legal notice and Ex.C10 is another receipt.
- Admittedly as per the pleadings, the complainant took loan of Rs.12,50,000/- from the OP bank and the same was repayable by way of monthly installment of Rs.40,500/- w.e.f.12.3.2016.As per the pleadings mentioned in para 4 of the complaint, in the year 2017, the truck met with an accident and inspite of that the complainant regularly paid the installment till 2018 but after that due to some domestic and financial problem he could not deposit the installment and in the month of September,2018 the OP took the possession of the vehicle.
- Admittedly the complainant become a defaulter as he could not pay the installment to the bank.
- In view of the above discussion, the bank is directed to release the said vehicle to the complainant immediately on receipt of the entire monthly installments which the complainant had failed to pay. The complainant is also directed to deposit the entire monthly installments which he had failed to pay. The OP is also burdened with costs of Rs.2000/-.
ANNOUNCED DATED:1.10.2020 Vinod Kumar Gulati Jasjit Singh Bhinder Member President | |
