DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MANSA. Complaint No.32/11.3.2008 Decided on : 27.02.2009 Gurdial Singh S/o Sh.Jaggar Singh, resident of village Khiwa Khurd, Tehsil and District Mansa. ..... Complainant. VERSUS 1.Mahindra & Mahindra Company Limited, Bathinda through its Area Manager, Opposite T.V.Tower, Model Town, Bathinda. 2.Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, Chahal Tractors, through its Proprietor/Partner & Dealer, Kahan Singh S/o Sh.Sukhdev Singh, Deena Tyre Street, Near Bus Stand, Mansa 3.Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, Bombay. 4. Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, Chandigarh. ..... Opposite Parties. Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. ..... Present: Sh.S.K.Chhabra, Advocate counsel for the complainant. Sh.B.N.Goel, Advocate counsel for the Ops No.1,3 & 4. Sh.Bimaljit Singh, Advocate, counsel for OP No.2. Before: Sh.P.S. Dhanoa, President. Sh.Sarat Chander, Member. Smt.Neena Rani Gupta, Member. ORDER:- Sh.P.S.Dhanoa, President. This complaint has been filed by Sh.Gurdial Singh son of Sh. Jaggar Singh, resident of village Khiwa Khurd, Tehsil and District Mansa, against the opposite parties, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Contd........2 : 2 : Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the 'Act'), for giving them direction to issue No Objection Certificate in his favour and to deliver him the registration certificate of his tractor and blank cheques deposited by him at the time of securing loan and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- for deficiency in service and cost of filing of the complaint in the sum of Rs.8500/-. 2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he purchased a tractor and got it financed from OP No.1 through its dealer carrying on its business at Mansa in the year 2002. The loan secured in the sum of Rs.2 lacs was to be refunded by him in installments alongwith interest payable at contractual rates. At the time of securing loan, the complainant delivered blank cheques on the demand of financer, but he deposited the the amount of installments in cash, as detailed in para No.3 of his complaint, and has deposited a sum of Rs.3,33,500/- till 29.11.2007. Thereafter he approached the opposite parties for return of blank cheques and registration certificate of his tractor and for issuance of No Objection Certificate. The opposite parties have refused to do so on the plea that amount of Rs.90,000/- is still outstanding towards him, because of which complainant, has been subjected to mental and physical harassment, hence this complaint. 3. On being put to notice, Opposite party No.2 filed written version, resisting the complaint, by taking preliminary objections; that he has no concern with the loan secured from the remaining opposite parties by the complainant. On merits, it is admitted that complainant had purchased the tractor from OP No.1, but it is denied that he acted as a dealer for advancement of loan to the complainant. Rest of the averments, made in the complaint, have been denied for want of knowledge, and a prayer, has been made, for dismissal, of the same with costs. 4. The defence of the remaining opposite parties was struck off vide order dated 18.8.2008, as they failed to file written version after grant of several opportunities to do so. Contd........3 : 3 : 5. On being called upon by this Forum, to do so, the counsel for the complainant tendered his affidavit, Exhibit C-1, and copies of documents Ext.C-2 to C-15 before his counsel closed the evidence. On the other hand, counsel for the contesting opposite party tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh.Mukesh Joshi, Field Officer, Ext.OP-A, copy of documents Ext.OP-1 and OP-2 including hire purchase agreement and statement of account of the complainant, before he closed evidence. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the oral and documentary evidence, adduced on record, by them, carefully, with their kind assistance. 7. The complainant in his affidavit Ext.C-1, has reiterated the allegations made in the complaint on solemn affirmation. He has also produced on record receipts issued by the opposite parties in different amounts on different dates, Ext.C-2 to C-15 showing deposit of amount of loan in installments. The OP No.2 has tendered Hire Purchase Agreement between the complainant and the opposite parties although, he has denied that he has played any role in advancement of loan to the complainant by the remaining opposite parties. He has also tendered in evidence the copy of statement of account of the complainant Ext.OP-2 but has not given any explanation as to how these documents have come into his possession. The evidence adduced on record by the complainant has gone uncontroverted as even OP No.2 has not filed his own affidavit. Therefore, we are unable to accept his plea that he did not act as a dealer of the opposite parties for advancement of loan by the remaining opposite parties to the complainant. For the said reason, no ground is made out for dismissal of the complaint against him. 8. As per details given in the hire purchase agreement Ext.OP-1, first installment of the loan was to be paid by the complainant on 1.7.2002 and last installment was to be paid by him on 1.1.2007 and he was to refund the entire amount of loan in 16 installments. The perusal of the Contd........4 : 4 : copy of the statement of account Ext.OP-2 also goes to show that complainant has committed default in payment of numerous installments of loan since he has not adhered to schedule of refund of loan secured by him from the opposite parties. Therefore, he is liable to pay charges on account of default in terms of Hire Purchase Agreement. The opposite parties cannot be directed by us to issue the No Objection Certificate and return the blank cheques stated to have been deposited by the complainant and to return the registration certificate of his tractor, until he deposits the remaining amount outstanding towards him, in the sum of Rs.77,207.78 plus future interest, if any, on the defaulting amount. 9. In the light of the above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties which may warrant indulgence of this Forum. 10. For the aforesaid reasons, we dismiss the complaint and leave the parties to bear their own costs. 11. The copies of the order be supplied, to the parties, free of costs, as permissible, under the rules. File be indexed and consigned to record. Pronounced: 27.02.2009 Neena Rani Gupta, Sarat Chander, P.S.Dhanoa, Member. Member. President.
