Orissa

Cuttak

CC/106/2018

Rinalata Rout - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director,Shriram Transport Finance Co Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

B M Mohapatra & associates

28 Dec 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C.No.106/2018

 

Rinalata Rout,

W/O:Narotama Rout,

At:Kolasahi,P.O:Darpani,

P.S:Barachana,Dist:Jajpur.                                               ... Complainant.

 

                                                                Vrs.

1. Managing Director,

Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd.,

101,105,1^st Floor,B Wing,

Shiv Chambers,Sector-11,C.B.D,Belapur,

Navi Mumbai-400614.

 

2. Branch Manager,

Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd.,

At:Chandikhol,P.S:Barachana,

Dist:Jajpur.                                                               ... Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:               Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

               Date of filing:     11.11.2018

Date of Order:    28.12.2022

 

For the complainant:           Mr. B.M.Mohapatra,Adv.& Associates.

For the O.Ps.             :              None.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President.           

          The case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition in short is that she being an unemployed youth had obtained loan from O.P no.2 and had purchased a vehicle in order to earn her livelihood vide loan agreement no.CHNDI0208020001.  The complainant had obtained loan of Rs.3,45,000/- and the same was to be repaid by her in 45 number of E.M.Is @ Rs.12,079/- effective from 5.9.2012 till 5.5.2016.  She had paid 28 number of E.M.Is amounting to Rs.3,30,300/- to O.P no.1 through O.P no.2.  The complainant had paid down payment of Rs.2,50,000/- and had purchased accessories worth of Rs.50,000/-.  Though she was regularly paying the loan dues as per the schedule she became defaulter and some instalments were due from her since because of the illness of her husband.  She had approached the O.Ps in this regard but they had seized her vehicle from Tangi area of Cuttackwith their henchmen on 25.8.18 at about 3 P.M..  According to the complainant, they had not sent any demand notice to her and as such the said seizure was illegal.  The complainant is ready to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- but the financier is not ready to receive the same.  Thus, she had to file this case claiming a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- towards compensation for her mental agony and harassment, another sum of Rs.2,25,000/- towards loss of her social prestige, further compensation of Rs.30,000/- for the unfair trade practice and also a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards her litigation expenses.

          The complainant has filed copy of her registration certificate only in order to prove her case.

2.       Having not contested this case the O.Ps were set exparte vide order dt.12.7.2022.

3.       The points for determination in this case are as follows:

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?

 

Point No.ii.

Out of the three points, point no. ii being the pertinent one is taken up first for consideration here in this case.

The complainant as noticed had purchased a vehicle in order to earn her livelihood by obtaining finance for it from the O.Ps.  She had executed the loan agreement vide No.CHNDI0208020001 and had thereby agreed to clear the loan amount in 45 number of E.M.Is which were to be paid by her from 5.9.2012 till 5.5.2016.  She admits that though she had paid 28 number of E.M.Is, still she  became defaulter by not paying some of the E.M.Is to the O.Ps.  Be that as it may, the settled principle of law is that the financier is never a service provider as alleged here in this case and the loan agreement as executed in between the complainant and the O.Ps envisages certain terms and conditions, violation of which by any of the party will repudiate the contract/agreement and thereby entitle the other party to act upon.  Here in the present case, as noticed the complainant by not paying the E.M.Is regularly became a defaulter which had infact breached the terms and conditions of the loan agreement as executed in between herself and the O.Ps and thereby had entitled the O.Ps to repossess the financed vehicle. When there is deviation to the terms and conditions of the loan agreement and when the complainant became a defaulter and had not turned up even after the notices and several requests as made to her, the claim of the complainant that she was not given notice and that she is ready to repay the outstanding arrears as made subsequently, does not hold good here in this case.  Thus, this Commission do not find any infirmity or latches in order to attract the deficiency in service here in this case.  Accordingly, this issue goes in favour of the O.Ps.

Thus, it can never be said here in this case that the O.Ps are deficient in their service when they repossessed or seized the vehicle of the complainant for which they had financed when the complainant became a defaulter in paying the regular E.M.Is.

Issues no.i & iii.

From the discussions as made above, it can never be said that the complainant is a consumer and she is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by her.

                                                            ORDER

Case is dismissed on contest against the O.Ps and as regards to the facts and circumstances of the case without any cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 28^th day of December,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.   

                                                                                                                                Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President

                       

                                                                                                                                                             Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                             Member