West Bengal

Birbhum

CC/92/2018

Goutam Mondal - Complainant(s)

Versus

S. Roy, Proprietor of Suro O Darshan - Opp.Party(s)

Sujay Das

06 Apr 2022

ORDER

The case of the complainant/petitioner in brief, is that one Gautam Mondal is a bonafide customer of OP Nos. 1,2 and 3.

            It is stated in this petition of complaint that the petitioner purchased two Air Conditioner from OP No. 1, as on dated 07/06/2017 vide invoice No. 635 one of these BLUE STAR AIR CONDITIONER BI/BO-3HW18FBTU, Batch/Serial: BM-3HW18FBUT17A14106 amounting of Rs. 30,480.34 and another is DAIKIN AIR CONDITIONER DTC50SRV162B/RC50SRV162B Batch/Serial: 9012845 amounting of Rs. 30,480.34, total amount Rs. 60,960.68 add VAT Rs. 8839.30 net total amount Rs. 69800/-. On that day the petitioner had paid amount Rs. 14,309/- in cash and due was assessed by the OP No. 1 amounting of Rs. 55,491/-

            The petitioner settled down with the OP No. 2 vide loan amount No. 1127010156026 with 8(eight) equal monthly installment. The assessed dues amounting of Rs. 55,491/- the said agreement was done by the OP No. 2 with the concerned OP No. 1. Thereafter, the petitioner deposited Rs. 6,980/- in cash as 1^st monthly installment for two air conditioner and the same withdrawn by the OP No. 2 vide Receipt Nos. 18579127, 18579128 vide Book No. 743166 dated 13/07/2017 in manual process.

            After that, the petitioner found from his Bank statement that the finance company i.e. OP No. 2 has duly been withdrawn through ECS, amounting of Rs. 6980/- dated 13/07/2017, it is specifically shown from the bank account concern.

            The petitioner send a legal notice dated 20/08/2018 by a Register post for return the amount Rs. 6980/- as double payment made by the petitioner. OP No. 2 received the legal notice which is sent through Ld. Advocate of Rampurhat Court and it was proved from the receiving the A/D.qqpqqp

            No fruitful result has yet been received from OP Nos. 1, 2 and 3, then the petitioner is bound to file this case which amounts to deficiency in service. Hence, this case with a prayer for return of double payment of installment amount Rs. 6980/- to the petitioner and direction against the Ops to pay to the petitioner a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation as against mental agony and harassment to the complainant as well as for cost of litigation and issue No Due Certificate from OP Nos. 2, 3 in favour of the petitioner.

            It appears from the case record that initially the case was filed against OP Nos. 1 and 2 but subsequently by grant of complainant’s amendment application dated 27/03/2019 by order No. 6 of the same date the cause title of the petition of complaint was amended and as OP No. 3. The Bajaj Finance Ltd. Registered office-Mumbai has been inserted and impleaded as OP No. 3. Both OP Nos. 1and 2 then appeared through Ld. Advocate and prayed on 16/10/2019 for filing V.nama as well as written version on next date but nothing submitted by Ops on subsequent dates and as a result of that by order No. 12 dated 15/01/2019 and order No. 2 this Forum (Now Commission) stated for running of the instant case exparte against both the OP Nos. 1,2 and 3.

            Complainant side submitted evidence-in-chief. Some documents have also been filed by the complainant. Written notes on argument (W/N/A) is also filed by the complainant and thereafter, Ld. Advocate for the complainant made oral argument in support of this case.

                                                                   Points for determination/Issues

1.  Whether the complainant is a consumer as per definition of the term ‘Consumer’ of the C.P Act. ?
2. Whether this Commission has jurisdiction to try this case?
3. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Ops?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any other relief or reliefs as prayed for?

 Decision with reasons

Point No. 1:

            Evidently the complainant has purchased two Air conditioner from OP No. 1 through loan from OP No. 2 vide loan account No. 1127010156026. Hence, the complainant is a consumer as per C.P Act.

Point No. 2:

            Pecuniary jurisdiction of the Forum i.e. Rs. 20,00,000/-. So, this Forum/Commission has territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction.

Point No. 3 and 4:

            Both points are taken up together for convenience of discussion as they are related to each other.

            On careful consideration of all these, it is undoubtedly proved that the complainant is a Consumer, within ambit of Consumer Protection Act, as amended. It is also true that there exists deficiency in service against the complainant. As a rightful consumer service from the part of the OP/Bajaj Finance Ltd. was not properly rendered to the complainant.

            It is proved from evidence on the part of the complainant’s side that EMI initiated from 13/07/2017. During 1^st instalment OP No. 2 took the installment amount Rs. 6980/- both by cash and through ECS i.e. double payment. Total number of installment paid 9 (8 through ECS and 1 in cash) instead of 8.

• It appears to us from the documentary evidences that OP members dishonestly earns extra profit Rs. 6980/- by withdrawn double EMI from the Complainant.
• The OP members cannot avoid their liability after receiving the legal notice from Ld. Advocate of the complainant. Ops are very much reluctant to return the double payment of installment made by the complainant.
• Hence, there exists deficiency in service against the complainant.

Hence, in absence of contra evidence from the side of Ops while the complainant files the documentary evidences, we are of the considered view, that the complainant has been able to prove his case. All the points are thus decided accordingly.

                        Hence, it is,

                                    O R D E R E D,

                                                            that the instant C.F. Case No. 92/2018 be and same is allowed in part exparte against all the Ops.

            All the OP members are jointly/severally are directed to pay the amount of extra installment charge Rs.6980/- to the petitioner along with interest thereon @ 6% per annum calculating on and from 13/07/2017 (i.e. from the date of 1^st installment) to till the date of full and final payment of the same to the complainant and Ops are also directed to pay Rs. 5000/- to the petitioner as compensation as against mental agony and harassment to the complainant as well as for cost of litigation Rs. 2000/- and issue No Due Certificate against the said loan account in favour of the petitioner immediately within 30 days from the date of this order, in default the complainant is at liberty to put this order in execution in accordance with law.

Let a copy of this order be given/handed over to the parties to this case free of cost.

The instant case is thus disposed of.