Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/916/2019

Shashi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Naresh Kumar Bedi

30 Jan 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/916/2019
Date of Institution	:	06/09/2019
Date of Decision	:	30/01/2023

 

Shashi, Aged 60 years W/o Late Sh. Jai Singh R/o House No.2176, Sector 20-C, Chandigarh.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Ltd., through its M.D/Director/Authorized Signatory SCO-2447-48, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh Pin Code 160022.

… Opposite Party

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                

ARGUED BY	:	Sh.Naresh Kumar Bedi, Counsel for Complainant.
	:	Sh.H.P.S.Kochhar, Counsel for OP.

 

Per Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member

1.      Averments are that the complainant had purchased one Mahindra Balero Pick-up, Model 2010 and the complainant entered into a contract dated 26.11.2010 with the OP. As per complainant, the loan was taken by the complainant dated 26.11.2010 from the OP. The loan was to be repaid in 48 installments. It is submitted that at the time of advancement of loan, the OP obtained blank signed cheques from the complainant, as security. The total loan installments have already been paid by the complainant to the OP alongwith interest thereon. However, the OP has not issued the NOC in respect of full and final payment of the loan amount to the complainant despite his repeated requests. It is also submitted that the OP has illegally charged Rs.2,000/- from the complainant for returning her cheques (Annexure C-2) colly. It requires the NOC for transfer of the ownership of said vehicle in her name as she had already cleared the entire loan amount of the financed vehicle to the OP. The complainant has also served legal notice upon the OP through her counsel, but the OP has even failed to reply to the legal notice or to issue the NOC to the complainant till date (Annexure C-3 & C-4). Hence, this present complaint.
2.     OP contested the consumer complaint, filed its written reply and stated that the NOC has not been issued by the OP for this reason. There are no illegal charges of Rs.2,000/- from the complainant for returning cheques. Four cheques of the complainant were dishonoured and as per loan agreement Rs.500/- for each dishonor has been agreed by the complainant to be paid to the OP. The total charges to be paid by the complainant to the OP are actually Rs.1,20,154/- i.e., Rs.2,000/- for 4 cheques being bounced and Rs.1,18,154/- as AFC (Additional Finance Charges) i.e., penalty @ 3 per month as monthly EMIs not paid on due dates as per loan agreement. It is also submitted that the complaint is barred by limitation as the complainant has not been filed within 2 years of the arising of cause of action. Admittedly, the complainant issued legal notice to the OP on 29.12.2016 and the limitation of two years after adding 2 days to receive the notice and 7 days after receiving of the legal notice, expired on 06.01.2019 which started from 07.01.2017. No application for condonation of delay has been filed alongwith the complaint. On these lines, the case is sought to be defended by OP.
3.     Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated.
4.     Parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
5.     We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case.
6.     The main case of the complainant is that inspite of paying all the installments ,the OP has not issued the NOC towards the completion of loan amount.
7.     The stand of OP is that the complainant’s four cheques were dishonoured and an amount of Rs.500/- per cheque (totaling to Rs.500x4= Rs.2000/-) has been charged towards dishonor of cheques. They have also taken a stand that AFC/Penalty @ 3% per month has been levied, on this amount, which works out to be Rs.1,18,154/-, so total penalty i.e., AFC amount + cheque bouncing charges, works out to be Rs.1,20,154/-.  We have also perused a table in the para 5 of written statement on merits of the OP. In the row 14, the total number of defaults in paying of installments is shown as ‘0’ zero, wherein in the row 16, number of delays not paid the monthly installments on due dates is shown as “11,125”. The information contained in the two rows is self contradictory. The OP has levied penal charges on cheque bouncing charges of Rs.2000/-, @ 3% per month, which amounts to Rs.1,18,154/-, which are beyond our imagination and appears to be very high to our mind. The bank by charging such huge penal charges of 3% per month, on cheque bouncing charges of Rs.2000/- has indulged in unfair trade practice, and by not issuing of NOC, after payment of all installments is deficient in providing service.
8.     In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly partly allowed. OP is directed as under :-

1. to issue NOC after receipt of an amount of ₹2,000/- from the complainant.
2. to pay an amount of ₹3,000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to her;
3. to pay ₹5,000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

9.     This order be complied with by the OP within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, it shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
10.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

			Sd/-
30/01/2023			[Pawanjit Singh]
Ls			President
			Sd/-
			[Surjeet Kaur]
			Member
			Sd/-
			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
			Member