*JUDGEMENT/ORDER This appeal takes an exception to an order passed by District Consumer Redressal Forum , Sangli in consumer complaint no. 601/2008 dated 29/04/2009. The facts leading to this appeal can be summarized as under:- The complainant had filed consumer complaint against Tataa Motors Finance Ltd., contending that he has purchased a vehicle from the opponent no.1 by taking loan of Rs.3,90,000/-. Complainant had given 46 cheques in advance of Rs.9,800/- each to the opponent. On 14/02/2006 there was an accident caused to the vehicle and hence, the complainant could not deposit remaining installment of the loan. For the outstanding installment the opponent has taken the possession of the vehicle unilateral and kept the vehicle with them for 45 days. The complainant paid Rs.56,000/- for loan and Rs.2,600/- as parking charges and after that the opponent t has returned the vehicle. Again because of non-payment of installment the the opponent has taken possession of the vehicle in March-2007 unilateraly and soled the vehicle. Hence, org.complainant/respondent has filed a consumer complaint praying that because of unilateral action of the opponent the complainant had suffered a loss and hence he has prayed for the amount of vehicle and for other expenses Rs. 6 Lkahs with interest. Consumer Forum after hearing both the parties has passed order dated 29/04/2009 directing the opponent no.1 to pay an amount of Rs.3,83,507/- with interest @ 16% p.a. from March-2007, to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/-, penal charges of Rs.5,000/- as cost. It is against this order that the present appeal is filed. Admittedly, the opponent has advanced a loan of Rs.3 lakhs to the org.complainant/respondents and for the repayment of loan the org.complainant/respondent has given 46 cheques of Rs.9,800/-. Admittedly, the vehicle, met with an accident on 14/02/2006. It is also on record that the appellant company had taken a unilateral possession of the vehicle. However it wwas realized after the org.complaiannt/respondent paid Rs.56,000/- and Rs.2,600/- as parking charges. Appellant has denied that it had tkane possession of the vehicle and kept with them the same for 45 days. From the perusal of the record produced by the org.complainant/respondent, it is established that he had paid Rs.2,600/- as parking charges and it proves that the appellant had taken possession of the vehicle and detained the vehicle for 45 days. It is the contention of the appellant that they have not taken possession of the vehicle and not sold the vehicle. However record produced by the complainant/respondent shows that the appellant has issued a No Objection Certificate for transferring the vehicle in the name of one Mr. Ingle. This amounts to deficiency in servie aand unfair trade practice also. From the available record the appellant could not produce evidence to prove that they have taken possession of the vehicle after following the due process of law. On the contrary, it is proved beyond doubt that possession was taken unilaterally. The original complainant/respondent has purchased the vehicle for earning his livelihood. No doubt there was delay in payment of installment by the respondent/complainant. Initially the appellant had taken possession of the vehile for 45 days. After complainant/respondent paid Rs.56,000/- outstanding installment of Rs. 26,000/- parking charges the appellant released vehicle. Again there was a default in payment of installment and the appellant had taken possession of vehicle forcibly and from the papers available on record has sold to third person. Unfortunately, the amount of sale proceed is not available on record. Conduct of the appellant before the Forum below does not show bonafide of the appellant. As against this the appellant had filed an affidavit which is not supported by the facts of the case. The org.complainant/respondent had purchased the vehicle for an amount of Rs.4,53,686/- as per invoice of which the amount of Rs.3,90,000/- was advanced as loan by the appellant. As per the record submitted by the appellant, the respondent has paid Rs.2,64,200/- as principal amount to the appellant and Rs.1,96,000/- is outstanding. Without following the due process the appellant has taken the possession of vehicle and sold the vehicle. Despite of paying the considerable amount the respondent is without the vehicle which he has purchased for earning his livelihood. The action of the appellant amounts to unfair trade practice. Taking into consideration all the aforesaid facts, the Ld.Forum has passed the order directing the appellant an amount of Rs.3,83,507/- with interest @ 16% p.a. We are of the opinion that amount ordered by the District Forum is just and fair. However, the interest seems to be higher side. Hence, we would like to reduce the interest rate from 16% to 12% p.a. we also confirm the finding of the Forum below on penal compensation and cost of the complaint. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, we pass the following order:- :-ORDER-: 1. Appeal is partially allowed. 2. In Clause no.1 of the impugned order passed by the Forum below the figure of rate of interest “ @16% pa.” be substituted with figure of “12% p.a.”. 3. Rest of the order is confirmed. 4. No order as to costs. 5. Copies of the order herein be furnished to the parties. |
