ORDER BY HON’BLE PRESIDENT- MR. P.K. PADHI:
JUDGMENT
Complainant has filed this consumer complaint U/s.35 of C.P. Act, 2019 seeking following reliefs;
“Direct the opposite party to pay the deposited amount of Rs.55,490/- with interest and Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and suffering and cost of the litigation”.
The brief fact of the case is that, the husband of complainant purchased one Suzuki Motorcycle bearing No.OD-05-AY-0884 on 28.10.2020 by loan sanctioned by the opposite party amounting to Rs.43,580/-. The husband of the complainant deposited sum of Rs.45,728/- as down payment before the opposite party and vehicle was duly insured valid from 28.10.2020 to 27.10.2021. The husband of the complainant died on 24.8.2021 suffering from covid-19 at S.C.B.M., Cuttack. During the Covid-19 pandemic period the husband of the complainant could not able to pay the EMI and defaulted for two installments but all on a sudden the opposite party through his agent repossessed the aforesaid motorcycle on 15.9.2021. There after the complainant rushed to the office of the opposite party and requested for release of the motor cycle to her but the opposite party refused to receive the defaulted installments from the complainant and openly declared before the complainant that the motorcycle has already been auctioned without notice to the complainant.
Notice was issued to opposite party on 11.4.2022 but the opposite party did not turn up and was set ex-parte on 30.6.2022.
The husband of the complainant had taken a loan and paid six installments from 28.10.2020 to 24.8.2021 i.e. within 09 installments to be paid. The husband of the complainant had deposited Rs.45,728/- as down payment and Rs.9,762/- as installments. Out of the loan amount of Rs.43,580/- as such the complainant has paid more than 60% of the cost of vehicle.
It is most unfortunate that immediately after the death of the husband of the complainant, the vehicle was seized by opposite party and immediately put to auction without giving sufficient notice to complainant when the sole bread earner has expired and when the family was in distress condition during Covid-19. Such action of opposite party amounts to unfair trade practice and harassment to the poor persons particularly to the widow, who could have use the vehicle for her children, who could have use the vehicle for which her husband has paid substantial amount. We would have deduct some amount towards depreciation cost for using the vehicle for 9 to 10 months by the husband of the complainant but taking into consideration the illegal and unethical action of opposite party during Covid-19 we direct the opposite party to return Rs.55,490/- (Rs.49,728/- + Rs.9,762/-) with 10% interest to the complainant from the date of seizure of vehicle to till date of payment. We also impose cost of Rs.3,000/- towards cost of litigation. The opposite party is free to recover the amount from the Officer or Manager at fault. With the aforesaid observation and direction the consumer complaint is disposed of.
Pronounced in the open Commission on this 05th Jan.,2023.
