PER SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL, PRESIDING MEMBER

                Adumbrated in brief, the facts necessary for the disposal of the instant complaint are that the Complainant purchased one Tourister 29+1 STR Bus from Swami Auto Sales, authorized dealer of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., for Rs.6,91,151/-. Out of the said amount, she got financed a sum of Rs.6.00 lacs from the OPs in May, 2005 and kept on paying her monthly installments till Jan. 2008. However, due to certain personal problems, she could not pay her monthly installments for the month of Feb. & March, 2008, upon which the OPs forcibly took the possession of the said bus from the driver of the Complainant without her knowledge. A legal notice was also sent to the OPs, but to no avail. Hence this complaint, alleging that the aforesaid acts of the OPs amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

2]             Notice of the complaint was sent to OPs seeking their version of the case.

3]             OPs in their reply while admitting the factual matrix of the case, pleaded that the Complainant had got the bus in question financed from them in the sum of Rs.6.00 lacs on 26.4.2005. Thereafter, she failed to maintain financial discipline of the loan account and her loan account went into default. She assured that she would try and arrange the funds, however, she failed to keep the words. Consequently, she showed her inability to deposit any sum towards the arrears outstanding in her loan account. Hence, the OPs were constrained to sell the said vehicle in order to recover the loan amount dues. All other material contentions of the complaint were controverted. Pleading that there was no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint.

4]             Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

5]             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

6]             The main contention of the complainant in the present complaint is that due to certain personal problems, she could not pay the monthly installments towards the financed amount of the bus in question for the month of Feb. & March, 2008, upon which the OPs forcibly took the possession of the said bus from the driver without her knowledge. In support of her contentions, she has placed on record Annexure C-1 and Annexure C-2B (Colly) the copy of the invoice and sale certificate dated 15.04.2005, to prove that the said bus was purchased by her from Swami Auto Sales, authorized dealer of Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd., Chandigarh. Annexure C-3 to C-38 are the copies of the receipts which shows she had paid the monthly installments to the OPs for the period from 23.03.2005 to 08.01.2008 for a total sum of Rs.3,88,900/-. Annexure C-39 is the copy of the agreement between the complainant and Genius International Public School, Ropar, with whom she had entered into contract for ferrying the school children in the said bus. Annexure C-40 is the copy of the legal notice sent by the complainant to the OPs regarding return of the above said bus after settling her loan account.

7]             On the other hand the OPs contended that the complainant had failed to maintain financial discipline of the loan account due to which it went into default and also she showed her inability to deposit any sum towards the arrears outstanding in her loan account, therefore, they were constrained to sell the said vehicle, in order to recover the loan amount dues. In support of their contentions the OPs have placed on record Annexure R-1 which is the copy of the surrender letter signed by the complainant to show that the complainant showed her inability to deposit any sum towards the arrears of her outstanding loan account and had voluntarily surrendered the bus in question. 

8]             Admittedly the said bus was got financed by the OPs for a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- in May, 2005 for which the complainant was required to repay the said loan in monthly installments vide loan agreement no. 306913. The complainant in para no. 2 of the complainant has admitted that due to some financial constraints, she was unable to pay the monthly installments for the month of February and March, 2008.  It is pertinent to mention here that she could not produce any receipts/evidence to prove that she had paid any installment to the OPs towards the financed amount of the said bus after February 2008 but instead of that on 15.07.2008, she herself had voluntarily surrendered the said bus with the OPs vide surrender letter Annexure R-1(signed by the complainant), due to the reason that she had violated by defaulting in the scheduled repayment of the loan in question.  Annexure R-1 has gone unrebutted by the complainant and nothing has been put contrary to it, to prove that the OPs have forcibly taken the possession of the bus in question.   In our view, after receiving Annexure R-1 from the complainant, the OPs were entitled to take the possession of the bus from the complainant and thereafter, left with no other option, to recover their remaining financed amount; they had auctioned it  on 3.10.2008 at Zirakpur and sold it to Harinder Singh, resident of House No.25, Sunder Nagar, Rajpura, District Patiala.

9]             In our view, the complainant herself had violated the terms and conditions of the contract by not paying the remaining installments of the loan in question due to some financial constraints and thereafter had voluntarily surrender the said bus to the OPs vide surrender letter, Annexure R-1. In view of the undertaking by the complainant in Annexure R-1, the arguments led by her that the OPs had forcibly took the possession of the said bus from the driver without her knowledge or she is entitled for getting the bus back from the OPs is not tenable in the eyes of law. The OPs have acted rightly recovered the bus from her after receiving the surrender letter from the complainant and for this act, we cannot hold them liable for any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part.

10]            In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant has not been able to prove any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.  There is no merit in the present case and the same is accordingly dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

                Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge.  The file be consigned.