BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, REWARI.
Execution Petition No: 35 of 2009.
Date of Institution: 25.2.2009.
Date of Decision: 28.1.2015.
Surender Singh son of Karan Singh, r/o 563 BI Qutabpur Rewari, Haryana.
…....Complainant/DH.
Versus
- Kotak, Mahindra Bank ltd. UGF,-1-11,upper ground floor, Ambadeep building, 14, Kasturba Gandhi MAarg New Delhi 110001 India through Manager,
- Inderjeet Singh Collection officer Kotak Mahindra Bank ltd. Municipal Council Market opposite Govt. School Ground Rewari.
….…Opposite Parties/JD.
Execution Petition
Before: Shri Raj Kumar ………. …..………..PRESIDENT
Shri Kapil Dev Sharma…………………MEMBER
Present : Shri Mir Singh, Advocate for the complainant/ DH.
Shri N.S.Tanwar, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
Per Raj Kumar President
In nutshell, the vehicle in question was repossessed by
the financer as the complainant was in default of payment of just one installment. The consumer Forum vide its order dated 20.8.2008 has directed to re-deliver the vehicle so repossessed from the complainant and reschedule the repayment schedule. The complainant was awarded compensation of Rs. 50,000/- on account of harassment so suffered. However, it came to notice lateron that opposite parties had already taken the possession of the vehicle on 14.9.2006 and also sold it on 27.9.2006 thereby rendering the order which was passed lateron non-executable, in letter and spirit. However, taking a pragmatic approach, the sale value of the vehicle which was sold on 27.9.2006 was to be adjusted from loan amount outstanding against the complainant as on that date. Now the question is as to how to calculate the value of the vehicle on the date of sale i.e. 27.9.2006. Both the parties have given their respective calculations. The main objection of the complainant is that the opposite parties while assessing the value of the vehicle have not taken into account the value of trailer which at the time of repossession, was worth Rs. Six lac and they have also not taken into account the value of MRF tyres of the trailer. The complainant has calculated the market value of the vehicle and has also disputed
20% deduction on account of depreciation.
2) Heard. After hearing the rival contentions of both the parties and going through the record available on the file, we are of the considered view that the objections so raised by the complainant are devoid of merit as no evidence regarding trailer was laid before the Forum nor any finding was returned by the Forum in its award dated 20.8.2008. The market value of the vehicle can also not be taken into account as the repossession was made and the vehicle was sold on 27.9.2006 and as such the opposite parties had rightly taken into account the depreciation of 20% as per the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs.1,44,000/-. The compensation amount of Rs. 50,000/-, admittedly, has already been paid. The insurance value of the vehicle on 6.4.2005 i.e. the date of insurance was Rs. 7,20,000/- . Loan amount outstanding as on 27.9.2006 was Rs. 4,45,328/-. Therefore, total amount now payable comes out to Rs. 1,30,672/-. We also take cognizance of the grave misconduct on the part of the opposite parties as they dared to sell the vehicle in question even during the pendency of the complaint and then concealing the same fact which came to the
notice of this Forum only during execution proceedings. This misguided adventure on the part of the opposite parties has resulted into great loss to the complainant. Since in execution we cannot travel beyond the record and evidence led earlier but we cannot be oblivious to the situation created by the opposite parties which resulted in prolonged litigation and causing loss of interest on the remaining aforesaid payable amount which , in our view, stands due from the very date of repossession of the vehicle. Accordingly, we direct the opposite parties to pay the aforesaid due amount of Rs. 1,30,672/- to the complainant with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date 14.9.2006 on which the vehicle was repossessed till payment. In view of the peculiar circumstances so explained, the complainant is also awarded litigation expenses which are quantified at Rs. 15,000/- against the opposite parties. Let compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. With these observations, the execution petition is disposed of accordingly. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced
28.1.2015. President,
Distt. Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Rewari.
Member, DCDRF,Rewari.
