View 359 Cases Against India Bulls
Geeta Devi filed a consumer case on 07 Jan 2020 against M/S. India Bulls Financial Services Ltd. in the New Delhi Consumer Court. The case no is CC/1236/2010 and the judgment uploaded on 08 Jan 2020.
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI(DISTT. NEW DELHI),
‘M’ BLOCK, 1STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN,
I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.
Case No.CC.1236/2010 Dated:
In the matter of:
Geeta Devi,
W/o Sh. Kailash Chand,
8784, Siddipura Rani Jhansi Road,
Opp. Fire Station,
Karol Bagh, New Delhi.
..COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Managing Director/ Sr. Manager/Chairman,
India Bulls Financial Services Ltd.,
F-60, Malhotra Building,
2nd Floor, Connaught Place,
New Delhi-110001.
Also at:
India Bulls House,
448-451, Udyog Vihar,
Ph.V, Gurgaon, Haryana.
...OPPOSITE PARTY
ARUN KUMAR ARYA, PRESIDENT
O R D E R
The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P. under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The facts as alleged in the complaint are that being influenced with the lucrative advertisement of the OP, she applied for the loan with the OP and the same was also sanctioned to the tune of Rs.17,550/- to be repaid in 48 instalments vide loan account NO.S000054431. As a part of loan document, the OP Co. kept with it 48 blank signed cheques as a security against the loan granted. An amount of Rs.742/- was deducted on account of instalments. The complainant sincerely paid the EMIs through ECS and subsequently by cash to the representative of OP. On 11.1.2010, the OP Co. deposited 3 cheques, out of these, one cheque got cleared and two cheques got dishonoured due to insufficient fund. OP presented false statement dt. 30.3.2010 and demand a sum of Rs.12,497/- from the complainant and further threatened her that if the said amount is not paid they would implicate her in false case. The complainant has paid entire amount along with interest to the OP but instead of issuing the NOC, OP Co. arbitrarily raised the outstanding and refused to issue NOC. The complainant requested OP to settle the account but all in vain, hence this complaint.
2. Complaint has been contested by the OP. OP filed its written statement in which it denied any deficiency in services on its part. During the pendency of the present complaint, OP counsel placed on record the details of the settlement arrived between the parties. It is further stated that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties before Mediation Cell, Dwarka vide Settlement order dated 15.3.2013 and the complainant had already paid a sum of Rs.5,000/- to OP Co. Hence, the present complaint became infructuous in the light of settlement arrived between the parties.
3. Both parties have filed their evidence by way of affidavits.
4. We have heard argument advance at the Bar by the complainant and have perused the record.
5. It is argued on behalf of OP that since the matter was already settled and payment was made by the complainant, the complainant ceased to be consumer within the meaning of section 2(1)(d) of CP Act.
6. Since the parties have already settled the issue before Mediation Cell, Dwarka vide Settlement order dated 15.3.2013 and the payment in terms of the settlement has already been made by the complainant then the present complaint cannot be sustained. Once parties settled their case, their rights to agitate further extinguishes (relied upon RP No.1798 of 2018 of Hon’ble National Commission titled as Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. M.M. Sharma dt. 12.10.2018.
7. In the light of above discussion we find no merits in the present complaint. The same is hereby dismissed.
A copy each of this order each be sent to both parties free of cost by post. Orders be also sent to www.confonet.nic.in. File be consigned to record room.
Pronounced in open Forum on 07/01/2020.
(ARUN KUMAR ARYA)
PRESIDENT
(NIPUR CHANDNA) (H M VYAS)
MEMBER MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.