Orissa

StateCommission

A/611/2014

M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Service Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Pundarkakshya Gahir - Opp.Party(s)

M/s. R.K. Pattnaik & Assoc.

28 Oct 2022

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for  the appellant.

2.              This appeal is  filed  U/S-15 of erstwhile  Consumer Protection Act,1986(herein-after called the Act). Hereinafter, the parties to this appeal shall be referred to  with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum.

3.                      The case of the complainant, in nutshell is that the complainant had incurred loan from the OP for Rs.4,35,098/-  on the agreement  to repay same in  35 monthly installment. The complainant alleged that  he has paid  all the instilment but did not issue NOC  to the complainant. It is  alleged that instead of issuing NOC  OP is  demanding Rs.20,076/- for final settlement. Therefore, the complainant sustained financial loss and mental agony. Hence, the complaint was filed.

 

4.            The OP  filed written version stating that the complainant has paid all the installments but overdue charges has  not been  paid. Therefore, delay payments charges amounting to Rs.27,434/- by virtue of delayed payment of EMI is payable by complainant. Further  they demanded said amount against the complainant to issue NOC.  Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

  5.                       After hearing both the parties, learned District Forum   have passed the following order:-

              Xxx       xxxx                   xxxx                   xxxx

                            “ In the result with these observations, findings, discussions the complaint petition is allowed on contest against the OP.

                               The O.P. is ordered return the differential amount a sum of  Rs.56,250/- and excess payment  of Rs.8,750/- and also ordered to issue “No Dues Certificate” in favour of the complainant  and further the O.P. is ordered to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of litigation.

                                   The awarded amount be paid in shape of demand drafts and “No dues certificate” issue in favour of the complainant and handed over the same to the complainant through this forum within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the O.P. is liable to pay interest @ Rs.12 % per annum from the date of default till payment.

                                    The O.P. is ordered to comply the above directions within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant is at liberty to file execution proceeding U/S-27 of the C.P. Act for realization  of the same from the O.Ps. “             

6.                  Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that   learned District Forum has committed error in law by not considering  the case of both the parties but made a third case asking for refund of Rs.33.936/- by the appellant and excess charges of Rs.21,686/-. According to him there is settlement amount neither demanded by the complainant nor there is evidence  to such amount payable by the OP to the complainant. He, therefore submitted to  set-aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal.

7.               Considered the submission of learned counsel for the appellant,  perused the DFR and impugned order.

8.                  It is admitted fact that there was agreement made between the parties  for payment of loan dues in 35 monthly installments. There is nothing found in the record  to show that there are any such overdue charges payable by  any agreement  or statement of account to show specific   to pay after installments are paid.  In such circumstances  when the entire amount  has already been  paid, NOC is to be issued. Since NOC is not issued,  learned District Forum directed to refund Rs.56,250/- but  there is no evidence  and materials filed by the complainant to get back that amount.  Therefore, we are of the view that the complainant is entitled to get NOC but he is not entitled to get back Rs.56,250/- because no such case is made out by him. Therefore, the impugned order is set-aside in part. While confirming the impugned order, we hereby direct OP to issue NOC to the complainant within 45 days hence. So far compensation and cost are concerned, the OP  is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- towards compensation only within a period of 45 days from the date of this order, failing which the entire  order passed by the learned District Forum  would  be revived.

                     The appeal is disposed of accordingly. No cost.

                      Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the confonet  or webtsite of this  Commission to treat same as copy of order received from this Commission.  

               DFR be sent back forthwith.                      

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

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.