ORDER                                 Dated: 09 -02-2017

Mohd. Anwar Alam, President

1.  Complainant filed this complaint on 14-07-2010 and alleged that he is maintaining a current account no. 02872560001659 in the name of M/s Kanahiya Imports with (HDFC Bank) OP2.  He further alleged that he wanted to buy a car make Hyundai i10 1.1 Color- B/ Red. On 31.12.2009, he deposited Rs. 20,000/- at M/s Himgiri Cars Pvt. Ltd for booking of Car.  After waiting for 20-25 days , as the car was not available in desired color he was advised  to contact another dealer of Hyundai Viz. M.G.F. Automobiles Ltd, New Delhi (OP1). On 22.01.2010 complainant again deposited Rs. 20,000/- with OP1 as booking amount of car. Complainant was assured that the disbursed loan amount (as proposed) would be transferred from Himgiri Cars Pvt. Ltd. to OP1 within a week or so.  Complainant further alleged that OP2 took as much as 45 days to reverse the money in his   kitty from OP1.   In the meanwhile M/s Hyundai Motors India Ltd had increased the cost of the booked car by Rs. 10,000/-. As OP2 failed to sanction and disburse the necessary loan amount to OP1, OP1 did not wait and sold the car to some other party and initially refused to return the deposited amount of Rs. 20,000/- to him. On great persuasion and efforts by complainant , OP1 refunded  Rs. 15,000/-  after deducting Rs. 5,000/-. OP2 despite having received back the disbursed principal loan amount back from Himgiri Cars Pvt. Ltd. and an EMI of Rs. 7589/- was being deducted regularly from the complainant’s aforesaid account.  Complainant issued legal noticed to OPs and OP2 on receipt of the notice partially realized its follies and thus refunded this deducted amount vide 2 entries in complainant’s said account viz Rs. 13,853/- on 10.06.2010 and Rs. 24,110/- on 15.06.2010. Hence complainant prayed to direct OPs to pay Rs. 5,000/- on account of illegal deductions , Rs. 10,000/- being the escalated cost of the car , Rs. 11,000/- being the difference of earlier available discount of Rs.23,000/- , current discount of Rs. 12,000/- , Rs, 1,00,000/- as damages , Rs. 2,50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment  and Rs. 11,000/- as litigation cost.  
2. In reply, OP1 stated that  a sum of Rs. 20,000/- was paid as advance booking by Kanahiya Imports and complaint is liable to be dismissed  on the ground that the same is not maintainable in the present forum.  OP1 admitted that one representative of Kanahiya Imports approached the OP for purchase of a car and accordingly paid a sum of Rs. 20,000/- against receipt. In reply, OP2 submitted that it was own will of complainant to buy a car from the said dealer and therefore he deposited Rs. 20,000/- as booking amount with the said dealer M/s Himgiri Cars Pvt. Ltd.  The loan agreement was duly executed by complainant and the officer based on the aforesaid documents, the aforesaid loan was disbursed to M/s Himgiri Cars Pvt. Ltd and not to OP1.  OP2 also submitted that the deduction of EMI was done according to repayment schedule.  However after disbursal of laon and after getting informed by the complainant about recalling of loan from M/s Himgiri Cars Pvt. Ltd and OP1. OP2 immediately cancelled the loan and refunded the total amount of 5 EMI i.e. Rs. 37,945/- in two entries dated 10-06-2010 of Rs. 13835/- and dated 15-06-2010 of Rs. 24,110/-.   OPs denied rest of the allegations made in the complaint and prayed to dismiss the complaint. 
3. The complainant has filed rejoinder to the written statement and denied the objections made by OPs and supported his complaint.
4. In support of  his complaint complainant filed his own affidavit along with documents i.e. copy of  receipt dated 31.12.2009 (Ex. CW-1/1) , copy of receipt dated 22.01.2010 (Ex. CW-1/2) , postal receipts and acknowledgement card (Ex. CW1/3) (colly) , legal notice dated 22.05.2010 (Ex. CW-1/4) (colly) , copy of reply dated 15.06.2010 (Ex. CW-1/5) , bank statement pertaining to deponent’s account (Ex. CW-1/6) , copies of the performa invoice (Ex. CW-1/7), price list (Ex. CW-1/8).
5. In support of reply OP1 filed affidavit of Sandeep Kumar (Account Executive) .  Shri Raj Kumar Anand (legal manager) has filed affidavit on behalf of OP2.
6. Both the parties filed their written arguments.
7. We have heard the arguments and considered the evidence led by the parties and their written and oral arguments.  In this case points to be considered are as under:-

1. Whether complainant is a consumer?

 (b) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs?

(c) Relief.

8. Mere perusal of the complaint clarify that the complainant was maintaining a current account in the name of his proprietary concern M/s Kanahiya Imports with OP2. Complainant applied for the car loan with OP2 and accordingly deposited  Rs. 20,000/-  with Himgiri on 31.12.2009  vide receipt Annexure I. It is pertinent to mention herein that Annexure -I is in the name of  Vandana Bhatiya and not in the name of complainant. The complainant further alleged that he again deposited Rs. 20,000/- with OP1 on 22.01.2010   as the booking amount of the car vide receipt (Annexure-II) which clarify that the amount was received from the M/s Kanahiya Imports Pvt. Ltd.   Accordingly the vehicle was booked in the name of M/s Kanahiya Imports and not in the name of the complainant.  This complaint is not filed on behalf of M/s Kanahiya Imports but by the complainant himself. As current account no. 02872560001659 maintained by OP2 was in the name of M/s Kanahiya Imports and the vehicles booked on 31.12.2009 and 22.01.2010 were in the name of Vandana Bhatiya and M/s  Kanahiya Imports, respectively, therefore OP2 sanctioned the loan amount for M/s  Kanahiya Imports and the vehicles were not booked by the complainant in his own name, therefore in our considered opinion complainant is not a consumer U/s 2 (i) (d) of Consumer Protection Act 1986.
9. Looking to the above facts and circumstances complainant is not a consumer therefore there is no need to decide the remaining points for consideration and accordingly this complaint is dismissed.
10.  Both the parties will bear their own cost.   Copy of the order made available to the parties free of cost as per law.  File  be consigned to record room.

Announced on………