Complaint No: 124 of 2019.

                                                                    Date of Institution: 01.04.2019.

                                                                           Date of order: 21.11.2023.

Randeep Singh Son of Satnam Singh, resident of Village Nanowal Jinder, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur now deceased through its Lrs:-

i)       Satnam Singh son of Dalip Singh

ii)      Ekamjot Singh minor son of Randeep Singh

iii)     Sehjal preet Singh minor son of Randeep Singh through Satnam

          Singh

iv)     Palwinder Kaur wife of Satnam Singh

All residents of Village Nanowal Jinder Tehsil and District Gurdaspur.

                                                                                                                                                                  ….......Complainants.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      

                                                                            VERSUS

Mehar Finance Company opposite Guru Nanak College Jalandhar Road, Batala, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur, through its Proprietor / Authorized signatory.

                                                                                                                                                                             ....Opposite Party.

                                                      Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Present: For the Complainants: Sh.Rahul Puri, Advocate.

             For the Opposite Party: Sh.B.S.Aujla, Advocate.          

Quorum: Sh.Lalit Mohan Dogra, President, Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu, Member.

ORDER

Lalit Mohan Dogra, President.

          Randeep Singh, Complainant (now deceased) (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, (here-in-after referred to as 'Act') against Mehar Finance Company (here-in-after referred to as 'opposite party).

2.       Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant purchased new motor cycle CD-Deluxe from Hero Kartar Motors Batala Road, Harchowal, Tehsil Batala and District Gurdaspur on 19.11.2016 for his personal use and above said Hero Kartar Motors prepared the Registration Certificate (RC) of the said motor cycle in question and registration authority allotted No.PB-06-AJ-0945. It is further pleaded that the R.C. of the motor cycle is in possession of the opposite party. It is pleaded that the complainant got financed the above said motor cycle from the opposite party on 19.11. 2016 for the amount of Rs.32,000/- and at the time of finance the motor cycle it was settled between the complainant and opposite party that the opposite party will charge interest at the rate of 1% per annum on the finance amount from the complainant. It is further pleaded that the complainant started pay the installment of the above said finance amount to the opposite party. It is further pleaded that first installment was paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No. 792 dated 06.12.2016 for the amount of Rs.2000/- and the second installment paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No.838 dated 31.12.2016 for the amount of Rs.2000/-. Third installment was paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No.917 dated 02.01.2017 for the amount of Rs.2000/-. Forth installment was paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No. 998 dated 07.03.2017 for the amount of Rs.2000/-. Fifth installment was paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No.1049 dated 03.04.2017 for the amount of Rs.2000/-. It is further pleaded that Sixth installment was paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No.1166 dated 20.05.2017 for the amount of Rs.2000/-. Seventh installment was paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No.1255 dated 30.06.2017 for the amount of Rs.2000/-. Eighth installment paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No.1261 dated 03.07.2017 for the amount of Rs.2000/-. Ninth installment paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No.6017 dated 08.08.2017 for the amount of Rs.2000/-. Tenth installment paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No.1456 dated 03.10.2017 for the amount of Rs.4000/-. It is further pleaded that Eleventh installment paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No.1616 dated 08.12.2017 for the amount of Rs.4000/-. Twelfth installment paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No.1978 dated 18.04.2018 for the amount of Rs.3000/-. Thirteenth installment paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No.2290 dated 04.08.2018 for the amount of Rs.5000/-. Fourteenth installment paid by the complainant to the opposite party vide receipt No.2484 dated 05.10.2018 for the amount of Rs.3000/-. Fifteenth installment paid by the complainant to opposite party vide receipt No.2769 dated 05.01.2019 for the amount of Rs.2000/-, in this way the complainant paid the amount of Rs.39,000/- to the opposite party against the finance amount of Rs.32,000/-. It is further pleaded that when the complainant paid last installment to the opposite party on 05.01.2019 and the opposite party disclosed to the complainant that the complainant has paid entire financed amount of the motor cycle along with interest to the opposite party and there is no outstanding amount against the complainant of the opposite party regarding the financed amount of the motor cycle in question and assured the complainant that opposite party will hand over the R.C. of the motor cycle in question alongwith NOC of the loan in question within one month. It is alleged that thereafter complainant many time approached the opposite party and requested the opposite party to issued NOC in favour of the complainant regarding the loan in question and also hand over the RC of the motor cycle in question, but the opposite party put the matter pending with one pretext or the other and has not handed over the RC of motor cycle in question and NOC of the loan in question to the complainant. It is further alleged that on 28.03.2019 at about 11:00 AM, when the complainant was on his duty, the employee of the opposite party illegally and forcibly snatched the motor cycle in question from the complainant and when complainant asked the opposite party regarding the above said illegal act of his employee and requested the opposite party to hand over the motor cycle of the complainant to the complainant, but the opposite party refused to hand over the motor cycle in question to the complainant. It is further alleged that act of the opposite party to snatch the motor cycle of the complainant from the complainant and also not to hand over the R.C. of the motor cycle and NOC of the loan in question is illegal, null and void, against the law and instructions. It is further pleaded that according to law, the opposite party is liable to hand over the motor cycle of the complainant to the complainant and also liable to hand over the R.C. of motor cycle and NOC of the loan in question to the complainant. It is further pleaded that due to this illegal act and conduct of the opposite party the complainant has suffered great loss and also suffered mental agony, Physical harassment and inconvenience. It is further pleaded that there is a clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

          On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency and negligence in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party and prayed that necessary directions may kindly be issued to the opposite party to hand over the motor cycle bearing No.PB-06-AJ-0945 and also hand over the R.C. of the motor cycle in question and NOC of the loan in question to the complainant and complainant also entitle for the compensation of Rs.20,000/- for illegally harassment to the complainant, in the interest of justice.

3.       Upon notice, the opposite party appeared through counsel and contested the complaint and filing their written reply, stating therein that the complainant purchased motorcycle from Kartar Motors Batala Road Harchowal, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur, but the date of purchased was 04.11.2016 instead of 19.11.2016. It is pleaded that Kartar Motors got prepared the Registration Certificate (R.C.) of motorcycle in question and allotted the Number. The R.C. of the motorcycle was himself deposited with the opposite party by the complainant as the opposite party financed the Motorcycle of the complainant. It is further pleaded that the opposite party is having a registered firm in the name of Mehar Finance Company at Batala and District Gurdaspur. It is further pleaded that opposite party is authorized signatory of the firm and the complainant took the loan of Rs.32,000/- from the opposite party for purchase the motorcycle from the Kartar Motors, Batala Road Harchowal. It is further pleaded that the opposite party had paid Rs.32,000/- to Kartar Motors on behalf of the complainant on 04.11.2016. It is further pleaded that amount was given @ of interest 24% per annum and on late payment will be charged @ 12% extra compensatory charges for each amount over due. It is further pleaded that complainant being hirer executed a written promise. It is further pleaded that as per agreement, complaint was to repay Rs.47,360/- in 24 equal installments of Rs.1973/- per month, but as per the record of the opposite party the complainant still have paid Rs.37,000/- and remain overdue amount towards the complainant is Rs.10,360/- and after calculating the amount till today it had become Rs.11,560/- after adding 12% compensatory charges of late payment. It is further pleaded that the complainant have paid the installments dated 06.12.2016 of Rs.2,000/, 31.12.2016 of Rs.2,000/-, 02.01.2017 of Rs.2,000/-, 07.03.2017 of Rs.2000/-, 03.04.2017 of Rs.2,000/-, 20.05.2017 of Rs.2,000/-, 30.06.2017 of Rs.2,000/-, 08.08.2017 of Rs.2,000/-, 03.10.2017 of Rs.4,000/-, 08.12.2017 of Rs.4,000/-, 18.04.2018 of Rs.3,000/-, 04.08.2018 of Rs.5,000/-, 05.10.2018 of Rs.3,000/-, 05.01.2019 of Rs.2,000/-. It is further pleaded that in this way the complainant had paid Rs.37,000/- till 05.01.2019. It is further pleaded that the receipt No.1261 dated 03.07.2017 is wrong and self-prepared. It is further pleaded that on 05.01.2019 the amount of Rs.10,360/- was overdue towards the complainant which he still has not been paid and after calculating the compensatory charges @ 12% per annum interest on the amount of Rs.10,360/- till today for six months, then it became Rs.11,560/-, which the complainant was required  to pay to the opposite party. It is further pleaded that the amount of loan is overdue against the complainant and the R.C. and NOC will be handed over to the complainant after clearing the financed amount. It is further pleaded that the complainant himself handed over his motorcycle to the opposite party company on the promise that he will take back the motorcycle after clearing the loan amount to the opposite party as per his written promise, but he did not turn for the same. It is further pleaded that the opposite party did not snatched the motorcycle of the complainant, but he himself handed over to the company as per his promise.

          On merits, the opposite party denied all the averments of the complaint and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. In the end, the opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

4.       Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of Randeep Singh, (Complainant) as Ex.CW-1 alongwith other documents as Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-16.

5.       Learned counsel for the opposite party has tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Mohan Singh, (through its Authorized Signatory, Mehar Finance Co., Gurdaspur) as Ex.OP-1/A alongwith other documents as Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-7.

6.       Rejoinder filed by the complainant.

7.       Written arguments filed by the opposite party, but not filed by the complainant.                                             

8.       Counsel for the complainant has argued that Randeep Singh (Now deceased) had purchased one motorcycle and for that purpose availed financial facility from opposite party for Rs.32,000/- and agreed rate of interest was 1% per annum. It is further argued that complainant had paid Rs.39,000/- to the opposite party upto 05.01.2019 against financed amount of Rs.32,000/-. However, opposite party refused to hand over R.C. and NOC to the complainant and thereafter on 28.03.2019 when he was on his duty, the employees of the opposite party forcibly snatched the motorcycle of the complainant which amounts to deficiency in service.

9.       On the other hand opposite party in person with his counsel has argued that as per payment schedule of hire purchase agreement Ex.OP-4 the loan amount of Rs.32,000/- was repayable in installments of Rs.1973/- per month starting from 04.12.2016 to 04.11.2018. However, the complainant defaulted in payment which is proved from payment schedule Ex.OP-6 as per which the complainant failed to deposit installments on due dates and as such penalties were also liable to be paid and as on 08.01.2019 the complainant was liable to pay Rs.10,360/- to the opposite party and on failure complainant had himself handed over the motorcycle to the opposite party vide writing Ex.OP-7 on 28.03.2019.

10.     We have heard the Ld. counsels for the parties and gone through the record.

11.     It is admitted fact that complainant had purchased one motorcycle on 04.11.2026 from Kartar Motors and value of motorcycle was Rs.45,223/- . It is further admitted fact that complainant had availed loan of Rs.32,000/- from the opposite party. It is further admitted fact that complainant had returned installments upto 08.01.2019 and thereafter failed to deposit the installments. It is further admitted fact that during the pendency of the present complaint original complainant Randeep Sigh has expired on 29.11.2021. The only disputed issues for adjudication before this Commission is that whether the opposite party is liable to return the RC and issue NOC in respect of the motorcycle or not, whether the amount is liable  to be paid to the opposite party by the complainant and with what rate of interest. Perusal of file shows that complainant had paid Rs.39,000/- in total as per receipts Ex.C2 to Ex.C16. Although, the opposite party has disputed the receipt No.1261 dated 03.07.2017 but has failed to produce any record to prove this fact. As such it is proved on record that complainant has paid Rs.39,000/- in total to the opposite party and the balance amount payable by the complainant was Rs.8360/- to the opposite party. As per hire purchase agreement Ex.OP-4 the rate of interest agreed between the parties is 12% per annum and we are of view that since the complainant had signed the said hire purchase agreement voluntarily and without any kind of pressure upon him, as such cannot wriggle out of the same. As such since the complainant has expired and the liability if any is of the L.Rs. of the complainant. As such we are of the view that L.Rs. of the complainant are liable to pay Rs.8360/- to opposite party alongwith interest @ 12% per annum without any penalties w.e.f. 08.01.2019 till 28.03.2019 and since it is admitted by both the parties during the course of arguments that motorcycle has been rendered unfit as such the cost of repair shall be borne by both the parties in equal shares after getting the same assessed from authorized dealer of the motorcycle i.e. Kartar Motors.

12.     Accordingly, present complaint is partly allowed with the following directions:-

          i)       L.Rs. of the complainant are directed to pay Rs.8360/- to the opposite party alongwith interest @ 12% per annum w.e.f.                     08.01.2019 to 28.03.2019 without any penalty.

          ii)      Both the parties are directed to get the motorcycle repaired after assessment of cost of repair from Kartar Motors and cost of            repair shall be borne in equal shares by both the parties.

          iii)     After repair of the motorcycle and receipt of remaining payment of Rs.8360/-, the motorcycle shall be handed over to the                  L.Rs. of the complainant by the opposite party.   

13.     The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases.

14.     Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. File be consigned.                                                                                                                                                               

            (Lalit Mohan Dogra)

                                                                                      President.  

Announced:                                                   (B.S.Matharu)

Nov. 21, 2023                                                       Member.

*YP*