BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.
Complaint no.206/13.
Date of instt.: 25.09.2013.
Date of Decision: 30.07.2015.
Shingara Singh, age about 50 years S/o Sh. Harnam Singh, resident of Village Sultania (Kartarpur) Tehsil Guhla, District Kaithal.
……….Complainant.
Versus
1. Mahindra & Mahindra Finance Company, Chotti Bara Dari, Patiala, Tehsil & District Patiala (Pb.) through its Manager/Head.
2. Mahindra & Mahindra Finance Company, Dhand Road, Kaithal, through its Manager/Head.
..……..Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
Before: Sh. Jagmal Singh, President.
Sh. Rajbir Singh, Member.
Smt. Harisha Mehta, Member.
Present : Sh. Vikram Multani, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Manoj Ichhpilani, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
(RAJBIR SINGH, MEMBER).
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that he purchased a truck Ashoka Leyland bearing registration No.HR-64-6644 under the loan sanction scheme and has been paying the instalments regularly. It is alleged that the complainant demanded his cash amount deposited slip of loan several times but each and every time, the Ops pretext the matter on day after tomorrow. It is further alleged that on 15.09.2013 at about 03.00 p.m., the Ops along with some muscle men visited the home premises of the complainant and asked to hand over the keys of truck upon which when the complainant asked the reason for that, they said that he has not paid the loan amount, so, he is not entitled to keep truck in question. It is further alleged that the complainant made several requests to admit his claim for issuing the detailed of deposited loan amount but the Ops refused to issue the detailed and threatened to snatch the truck in question. This way, the Ops are deficient in service. Hence, this complaint is filed.
2. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared before this forum and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus-standi; that the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum. In fact, the Ops are engaged in the business of auto finance. The complainant had approached the Op No.1 in the month of December, 2011 for getting commercial vehicle loan for the purchase of a truck. An amount of Rs.18,65,000/- was advanced to the complainant for the same vide loan agreement dt. 07.12.2011 which was duly executed and signed by the complainant. The complainant had to repay an total amount of Rs.24,65,150/- including Rs.6,00,150/- as finance charges/interest in 47 EMIs of Rs.52,450/- per month. But the complainant failed to repay the aforesaid EMI in time. He was/is irregular in payment. In fact, he has to pay 22 instalments upto 08.11.2013 but he has deposited only 11 instalments and part payment towards the 12th instalment. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant has never deposited even the aforesaid deposited instalments in time and always used to deposit the same with delay every time. Hence, the complainant was in default of an amount of Rs.5,25,600/- plus charges towards the regular instalments upto 08.11.2013 besides the future instalments and AFC. There is no deficiency in service on the part of answering Ops. On merits, the contents of complaint are denied and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.
3. In support of his case, the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to C10 and closed evidence on 03.03.2015. On the other hand, the Ops tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.RW1/A and documents Ex.R1 to R5 and closed evidence on 13.01.2015.
4. We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and minutely and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.
5. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we found that the complainant purchased a truck Ashoka Leyland bearing registration No.HR-64-6644 under the loan sanction scheme and has been paying the instalments regularly. Ld. Counsel for the complainant contends that the complainant demanded his cash amount deposited slip of loan several times but each and every time, the Ops pretext the matter on one pretext or the other. On 15.09.2013 at about 03.00 p.m., the Ops along with some muscle men visited the home premises of the complainant and asked to hand over the keys of truck upon which when the complainant asked the reason for that, they said that he has not paid the loan amount, so, he is not entitled to keep truck in question. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the Ops contends that the complainant has to pay 22 instalments upto 08.11.2013 but he has deposited only 11 instalments and part payment towards the 12th instalment. The complainant has failed to produce all the receipts on record. Thus, before proceeding ahead, we would like to mention that there are the intricate questions of law and facts, which require elaborate evidence and the same is not possible in this time-bound proceedings. In this context, we are fortified with the observations made in the case titled Love Motels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh 2007(4) CPJ page 305 (NC) wherein it has been observed by Hon’ble National Commission that Complicated issues involved, not adjudicable summarily-Dismissed with liberty to seek remedy in Civil Court and in the case reported as M/s. The Bills through its Proprietor Vs. PNB 1998(1) CPC page 150, Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory, Chandigarh, wherein it has been mentioned that Complicated issues being involved, the matter needs to be decided by Civil Court-Complaint stands dismissed.
6. In view of above discussion, we disposed off the complaint accordingly. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach the civil court or court of competent jurisdiction, if so desired and in that eventuality, complainant will be entitled to the benefit of Section 14(2) of Limitation Act and the time taken during the pendency of this complaint shall be exempted. A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced.
Dt.30.07.2015.
(Jagmal Singh),
President.
(Harisha Mehta), (Rajbir Singh),
Member. Member.
