Complaint Case No. 25/2020

Vijay Pal S/o  Sri Kishan Lal R/o Ramnagar DurgaNagarColony, Khair Road, Tehsil Pargana Koil Distt Aligarh

V/s

1. Prop. Shiv Motors authorized dealer T.V.S.Motor Co. Ltd. Aligarh near FCI Godam front of Alampur Gatiya Road, Sarsaul G.T.Road, Aligarh 
2. Manager T.V.S. Credit Services Ltd., Regional Office 103 Padam Bussiness Park, Sector 12 Avas vikas Colony, Sikandra Agra
3. Manager, Paninsula Bussiness Park, Tower A 15^th floor G.K. Mrag Lovar Peral Mumbai, Maharastra 400013

CORAM

 Present:

1. Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President
2. Shri Alok Upadhayay, Member
3. Smt. Purnima Singh Rajpoot, Member

PRONOUNCED by Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President

JUDGMENT

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant before this commission for directing the OP to release the motorcycle from its possession in favor of the complainant on payment of Rs.4820 by the complainant to the OP and for awarding litigation expenses and any other relief suitable in the opinion of the commission.   
2. Complainant has stated that A TVS Star motorcycle was sold for Rs. 59325 by the Op no.1 on 28.2.2016 in easy installments having paid Rs. 13000 and  was registered in the name of complainant on 31.10.2016 bearing registration no. UP 81BN 0672. He has paid 15 installments of the amount Rs. 2767 *15 total Rs. 41505 and thus he had paid total amount Rs 54505 and an amount Rs. 4820 is due. Complainant had suffered from paralysis and could not make the payment of the installments on 27.2.2018. The OP had taken forcible possession of the motorcycle through its servants Sandeep and Ajay Sharma with out giving any notice and is in possession of the OP since 28.2.2018. Complainant is ready to pay the amount Rs. 4820.        
3. Op no.1 stated in its response submitted on 20.4.2021 that the complainant was sold motorcycle no. UP 81 BN 0672 financed by the TVS credit service Ltd which was taken into possession by the financer in default of payment of installments.
4. OP No.2 stated in WS that the complainant had taken loan amount Rs.50000 to purchase the motorcycle and he had to repay the loan amount in 24 installment but he have not paid all the installment and his account was declared NPA. OP No.2 had taken possession of the motorcycle without using force complying with the rules and the complainant was informed prior to making auction. Complainant was informed that the motorcycle shall be sold in auction if the payment is not made but the complainant did not make the payment of outstanding amount and motorcycle was sold in auction for Rs. 26000 on 9.4.2018 following the rules. After sale of the motorcycle an amount Rs. 18155.97 is due against the complainant. The motorcycle has been sold to third party and the complainant has become infructuous. There is arbitration clause in the agreement and complaint is barred by section 8 of Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996.    
5. Op no.3 did not contested the case despite of sufficient service.
6. Complainant has filed his affidavit and papers in support of his pleadings. OP no3 has filed their affidavit and papers in support of their pleadings
7. We have perused the material available on record and heard the complainant.
8. Complainant has stated that vehicle was seized by the servants of the Op no.2 namely Sandeep and Ajay Sharma in default of payment of the installments of loan amount supported with the affidavit. OP no.2 has barely denied the allegation made by the complainant and there is no affidavit of any person in support of the denial and thus the allegation made by the complainant stands proved and it is found that the motorcycle was forcibly seized by servants of OP no.2. It is evident from the registration certificate   that vehicle was purchased under hire purchase agreement and OP no.2 was not authorized to seize the vehicle without following the due procedure of law. Complainant has stated that vehicle was seized without giving  any notice to him. OP no.2 has stated that complainant was served with the notice and copies of notice have been filed but there is no endorsement of any date on the alleged notice. OP no.2 has not file any postal receipt of effecting service of notice on complainant. OP no.2 has also not deposed on affidavit that any notice was served on the complainant. there is nothing on the record to show that any order was obtained from any court of law to seize the vehicle. It is also relevant to note that the OP no.2 has not made clear about  giving of the notice to the  RTO under section 51(5) of the MV Act  regarding seizer of the vehicle and to get registration certificate.  Thus it is clear that the vehicle was seized without following procedure of law and the motorcycle was illegally got seized by the OP no.2. Refer-Revision Petition No. 737/2005  City Crop Maruti Finance Ltd. V/s Vijay Laxmi , NCDRC. As the  vehicle has been sold to third party complainant may be granted relief of payment of the price of the vehicle with interest.
9. The question formulated above is decided as above in favor of the complainant.
10. The second question of consideration before us is whether the commission has jurisdiction to hear and decide the present case?
11.    In view of provisions of section 100 of the Act,2019 District Commission is vested  with the jurisdiction for compensation in addition to the relief to be granted under Arbitration and conciliation Act or any other court of law.
12. We are of opinion that  the complainant is entitled to get the price of the vehicle Rs. 59325          
13. We hereby direct the Op no.2&3to pay to the complainant the price of vehicle Rs.59325 with pendente lite and future interest @9%  per annum with litigation expenses Rs.10000/.
14. Ops shall comply with the direction failing which Ops shall be prosecuted for non-compliance in accordance with section 72 of the Act for awarding punishment against him.
15. A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties as per rule as mandated by Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties.
16. File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this judgment.