CCNO.1566 of 2018  

ORDERS ON MAINTAINABILITY

The case of the complainant is that the complainant has obtained an auto loan of Rs.11,43,000/-from the OP financial institution Bank on 24.11.2016. Loan repayment is required to be made in 60 monthly installments. He has paying the installments regularly.  Without there being any justifiable reason OP issued a notice calling upon the complainant to clear all the outstanding dues as on the date and also stated that they are entitled to take possession of the said vehicle in case of default. The very act of OP is amounting to deficiency of service. Hence this complaint.

On perusal of the complaint, documents and the notice issued by Op filed by the complainant it is mere apprehension or anticipation of the complainant.  It is mentioned in the legal notice stating that if the complainant do not pay the dues as per the terms and conditions it is entitled to take possession of the vehicle. It does not mean that it is going to seize the vehicle in question. But, it is just a caution to its customer to not to dilute from the obligation fixed under the terms and conditions of loan agreement.  Complainant states that despite the complainant tendering the EMIs in relation to the Auto Lone without demur till date he received notice from the OP stating that he will take coercive steps to seize the vehicle in question which apprehends the complainant that the OP may seize their property. We are of the considered view that the complaint filed is based on mere apprehension which cannot be held deficiency rendering the service or it can be consider as unfair trade practice which constitute cause of action. Hence complaint is here by rejected.