CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel)

New Delhi – 110 016

Case No. 873/2009

MEENA KUMARI

D/O LATE H. KARTAR SINGH

726, SECTOR-4,

R.K. PURAM, NEW DELHI.

…………. COMPLAINANT                                                                                     

                                    VS.

MAGMA FINCORP LTD.

(Through Its Managing Director),

A-193, OKHLA, PHASE-I,

NEW DELHI-110020.

      …………..OPPOSITE PARTY

Date of Order : 25.10.2016

O R D E R

A.S. Yadav – President

It is not in dispute that the complainant took a loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- from OP against hypothecation of her car. The loan amount was to be repaid by way of fifty-nine monthly installments of Rs. 6,000/- each. Contention of the complainant is that she was regular in payment of installment, however, certain cheques were deposited by the OP without taking her permission because of that those cheques bounced. The dispute is regarding incashment of cheque No. 759393 for a sum of Rs. 11,757/- on 02.12.2009. It is stated that the said cheque was in respect of the security and stated that it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service. Complainant has prayed that OP be directed to reimburse Rs.11,757/- and also be restrained from taking possession of the car and sought Rs.50,000/- as damages.

OP in reply stated that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the OP rather as on 07.01.2010 the complainant is liable to make payment of Rs.4,14,000/- towards the loan amount. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

We have gone through the written statement of the parties and carefully perused the record.

In para 5 of the complaint, the complainant has mentioned about the withdrawal amount of Rs. 11,757/- dishonestly by OP on 07.12.2009 vide cheque No. 759393. In reply to this para, OP has stated that all the cheques were deposited by OP as per the schedule and all the allegations made by the complainant in present para are wrong and denied. The OP has filed the statement of account on record that statement of account is not showing the encashment of this cheque for Rs.11,757/- whereas the statement of account filed by complainant clearly shows that on 02.12.2009, OP has withdrawn a sum of Rs. 11,757/- vide cheque No. 759393 and on the same day, the OP has already withdrawn a sum of Rs. 6000/- vide cheque No. 756155. In the statement of account filed by OP, the payment received against cheque No. 756155 is reflected but the payment received in respect of cheque No. 759393 is not reflected. No doubt, the statement of account placed on record by the OP, shows that the loan amount is Rs. 3,00,000/- and they have already received Rs. 4,08,000/- and still the outstanding amount is Rs. 4,14,000/- but the facts remain that in the entire statement of account filed by the OP, this amount is not reflected.  This complaint is in respect of amount of Rs 11,757/- and this amount is not reflected in the statement of account filed by the OP.

It is clear cut case of deficiency in service.  This amount be adjusted towards amount payable by the complainant. 

However, OP is directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards compensation and Rs. 3,000/- towards litigation expenses.

Let the order be complied with within one month of the receipt thereof.  The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.

Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.

             (D.R. TAMTA)                                                         (A.S. YADAV)

                 MEMBER                                                               PRESIDENT