Orissa

Jajapur

CC/84/2017

Sk.Raheman - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director,L&T Finance Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Badri Narayan Panda

28 Feb 2020

ORDER

 IN  THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.

                                                        Present:      1.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, I/C President,

                                                                            2.Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.                                                                 

                                                      Dated the 28^TH  day of  February,2020                                                   

                                                          C.C.Case No. 84  of 2017

Sk. Raheman , S/O SK. Sahid  

Vill- Goleipur , P.O.Hatasahi

P.S. Korei  . Dt.Jajpur 

                                                                                                                  ……....Complainant .                                                                                                      

                                                  (Versus)

1.  Managing Director ,L& T Finance Ltd, 2^nd floor, plot No. 428/3818 ,

Jayadev Nagar,Bhubaneswar.

2. Branch Manager, L & T Finance Ltd,  At/P.O. Chandkikhole  , Dt.Jajpur

 

                                                                                                                                ……………..Opp.Parties.                                                                                                                                                             

For the Complainant:                              Sri B.N. Panda,   Advocates  .

For the Opp.Parties :                                Sri B.K. Tripathy, Advocate.     

                                                                                                     Date of order:  28 .02. 2020.

MISS  SMITA  RAY  , L A D Y    MEMBER   .

The petitioner has filed the present dispute against the O.Ps  alleging deficiency in service .

            The facts as stated by the petitioner in the complaint petition shortly are that the petitioner  being an unemployed youth for maintain his livelihood  had   purchased   a vehicle bearing Regd. No. OR-04-M-5572 on 1^st January -2011 with the financial assistance of the O.Ps and the above vehicle has illegally seized by the O.P on 27.02.2012  and subsequently the O.P sold the vehicle without pre-sale notice to the petitioner. That law is well settled there is no evidence of any public notice  having been given by the O.Ps in news paper before selling the vehicle which was repossessed from the petitioner. Therefore it can not be said that the vehicle was sold by following a fair and transparency process , This is  deficiency in service on the part of O.Ps in rendering service to the petitioner as well as  patient and unfair trade practice . After sale of the vehicle the O.P call upon the petitioner for final settlement / one time settlement on 31.03.2015 . The petitioner paid Rs.1,00,000/- by cash and has obtained   money receipt from the O.Ps on 31.03.2015.

            Thereafter it is surprise to mention here that after lapse of two years the O.P issued a lowyer notice to the petitioner for settlement of the outstanding dues .Hence, this attitude of the O.Ps not only deficiency  in service but also unfair trade practice. Accordingly the petitioner knocked the door of this Fora  with the prayer to direct the O.Ps  to issue N.O.C without any further delay  and  due to  their deficiency in  service on heavy cost be imposed .

            After notices, the O.ps have appeared through their learned advocate and filed their written version taking the stand that

As per term and condition of the agreement as enshrined under clause 17.1 if any dispute arose between the parties then the matter shall be referred to Arbitration under the Arbitration and conciliation Act,1996. Accordingly the present O.P  vide letter dt.19.07.12  has referred the matter to the Sole Arbitrator and   after following due procedure of law as per Arbitration and Concillaion Act,1996 has passed Arbitration Award on 10.12.12, It is humbly submitted that the Hon’ble N.C.D.R.C in the case of installment supply Ltd- Vrs. Kangra Ex-servicemen Transport Co. and Another , 2007(1) CPC –p-411  has categorically held that the consumer complaint case is not maintainable  in case where an arbitration award has already been passed . In view of the  aforesaid fact and position of law this Hon’ble Forum  would be graciously please to dismiss the complaint petition of the petitioner being devoid of merit and vexatious in nature and be further pleased to impose heavy fine .

            On the date of hearing we heard the argument from both the sides. After perusal of the record and documents in details it is undisputed fact that the petitioner purchased the above vehicle with the financial assistance of O.pno.1 and 2.

It is also undisputed fact that the petitioner became a defaulter to pay the EMI of the alleged vehicle  but after perusal of the Arbitration Award passed  by the learned arbitrator on 10.12.12 , the present dispute  was filed on 11.12.17 . Accordingly it is our considered view that the present dispute is not maintainable before this Forum as per observation of Hon’ble NCDRC,New Delhi  in the case of Installment Supply Ltd- Vrs- Kangra Ex-servicemen Transport  co and another  reported in 2007(1) CPC-p-411 has categorically stated that :

Hence the consumer complaint case is not maintainable the  arbitration award has already  been passed.”

                                                O R D E R

            In the result the C.C.Case is dismissed. No cost.

This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 28th  day of  February,2020. under my hand and seal of the Forum.