Heard learned counsel for the appellants. None appears for the respondent.

2.      This appeal is filed u/s 15 of the Consumer Protection Act (hereinafter called the ‘Act’ in short). Parties hereinafter were arrayed as the complainants and OPs as per their nomenclature before the learned District Forum.

3.      The case of the complainant in nutshell is that the complainant in order to purchase a loader bearing Registration No. OR-16A-3691 had incurred loan from the OP – financer for an amount of Rs.19,21,350/- with condition to repay the same in 35 instalments. It is alleged inter alia that after due instalments have been paid the complainant did not get back the documents and NOC in spite of his best effort. So, the complaint was filed.

4.      OPs appeared and filed written version stating that  they have extended loan to the complainant on condition that complainant would repay the same on instalment basis but the complainant did not pay as per the instalment amount for which there is delay payment charges demanded against the complainant. It is also stated that the complainant was in arrear of payment of Rs. 4,23,633/. Since it is not paid, they have not issued NOC to the complainant. So, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.

5.      After hearing both the parties, the learned District Forum passed the following order:-

“xxx   xxx   xxx

Considering the above fact an circumstances, without adducing any cogent evidence, the OPs are not liable to get any overdue charges as demand from the complainant in respect to the finance of the disputed vehicle rather they have to return the excess amount of Rs.65,000/- already taken from the complainant during recovery of instalments. For the reasons aforesaid and under the facts and circumstances we hold that the complaint petition deserves consideration and the complaint case is allowed on contest against the OPs by directing OPs to issue NOC/No Dues Certificate to the complainant with returning Rs.65,000/- as excess amount recovered from the complainant through instalments charging no other OD. The OPs are further directed to comply the order within 30(thirty) days of receiving this order failing which Rs.25,000/- towards compensation with interest @ 09% per annum as penalty would be applicable.”

6.      Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the learned District Forum committed error in law by not considering the agreement and the statement of account duly placed by the OPs. According to him had the agreement and the statement of account taken into consideration and discussed the learned District Forum would have dismissed the complaint. However, he challenged the impugned order and finally submitted to set aside the same by allowing the appeal.

7.      Considered the submission of learned counsel for the appellants and perused the impugned order including the DFR.

8.      It is admitted fact that the complainant has incurred loan of Rs.19,21,350/- to purchase a loader on 7.4.2012. It is also not in dispute that complainant was paying the instalments. Learned District Forum has passed order by stating that OPs have not filed any documents in support of their claim. But we find that the agreement and the statement of account while available in the DFR. For such wrong observation we have to peruse the said documents. It appears from the agreement which is binding upon both the parties at clause 02(i) that the financer can claim the overdue charges if there is some amount remained unpaid by the complainant. The statement of account shows that the complainant was not consistent in payment of the exact amount as per the payment schedule. Therefore, the overdue charges have been charged. The statement of account shows that there is Rs.4,23,633/-  payable by the complainant. When the complainant is required to pay the overdue charges of such amount, it is not possible to direct for issue of NOC.

9.      Learned District Forum without considering the documents arrived by the conclusion which is not sustainable in law. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and is set aside.

10.      The appeal stands allowed. No cost.

           DFR be sent back forthwith.

          Supply free copy of this order to the respective parties or the copy of this order be downloaded from Confonet or Website of this Commission to treat same as copy supplied from this Commission.