DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA

CC.No.486 of 20-10-2010

Decided on 11-02-2011

Bal Krishan Goyal son of Sh.Hans Raj Goyal, Pooja Wala Mohalla, H.No.5558, Near Hanuman Mandir,

 Bathinda.

.......Complainant

Versus

Shree Ram Transport Finance Company Ltd., through its Manager/ authorized person, Ist Floor, above

Amway, 2765-B, Tinkoni Chowk, GT Road, Bathinda.

......Opposite party

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.

Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member.

Sh.Amarjeet Paul, Member.

Present:-

For the Complainant: Sh.Sanjay Goyal, counsel for the complainant.

For Opposite parties: Sh.J.S.Kohli, counsel for the opposite party.

ORDER

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended up-to-date (Here-in-after referred to as 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant took a loan of Rs.5,90,000/- from the opposite party for purchasing one vehicle Tata LPT 1109 and the same was disbursed to the complainant by the opposite party which has to be returned in 47 equal monthly installments of Rs.18,200/- each. The complainant has alleged that at the time of obtaining the loan, the opposite party has taken signatures on various blank papers whereas no loan agreement or repayment schedule was supplied to the complainant and the complainant issued 47 post-dated cheques of Rs.18,200/- each. The said vehicle was purchased by the complainant for the purpose of earning his livelihood and for self employment. The said vehicle was a second hand vehicle and till date 29 installments of Rs.18,200/- were to be deposited which came to the tune of Rs.5,27,800/- whereas the opposite party has got deposited Rs.6,69,950/- from the complainant and all this amount has been collected by the opposite party in cash and the opposite party without assigning reason have not presented the post dated cheques of installments and have been charging late payment charges from the complainant. The complainant had to deposit Rs.5,27,800/- till now whereas he has deposited Rs.6,69,950/- which means he has deposited Rs.1,42,150/- in excess. The opposite party is demanding the arrears from the complainant. The opposite party has been taking cash payment of installments and is not crediting the amount in loan account and has been sending the same to some insurance companies which are concerned to the opposite party whereas the complainant has never authorized the opposite party to purchase the insurance for the vehicle. The complainant had requested the opposite party to adjust the amount of Rs.1,42,150/- and issue NOC after getting the amount due paid from the complainant but the opposite party refused to adjust the amount of Rs.1,42,150/- and also refused to get deposited the amount of remaining loan amount, if any. Hence, the complainant has filed this complaint with prayer to adjust the amount paid excess by the complainant towards the vehicle No.HR 46-B/6456 in future installments after giving interest on excess amount and to issue NOC after getting the amount due if any deposited from the complainant after waiving off the interest on all the future installments besides this, cost and compensation.

2. The opposite party has admitted in its written reply that the complainant took a loan of Rs.5,90,000/- from it for the vehicle Tata LPT 1109 but had denied all the other allegations. As per repayment schedule, the first installment was of Rs.18,202/- and the remaining 46 installments were of Rs.18,208/- each. The opposite party has denied that they have obtained 47 cheques from the complainant and had obtained the signatures of the complainant on blank papers. The complainant executed all the loan documents voluntarily after carefully hearing, understanding and admitting the contents of the same. The opposite party has further pleaded that the complainant is using the said vehicle for commercial purpose and as such, he does not fall within the definition of the consumer under the 'Act'. The opposite party had denied that the complainant deposited Rs.6,69,950/- with the opposite party. The complainant has deposited total a sum of Rs. 5,60,350/- with the opposite party till date i.e. Rs.18,210/- on 31.05.2008, Rs.18,200/- on 10.07.2008, Rs.36,850/- on 25.08.2008, Rs.18,300/- on 03.10.2008 Rs.36,500/- on 05.12.2008, Rs.18,200/- on 18.02.2009 and 18.03.2009, Rs.13,330/- on 16.05.2009, Rs.36,500/- on 31.05.2009, Rs.18,200/- on 24.06.2009, Rs.36,400/- on 11.08.2009, Rs.36,500/- on 29.09.2009, Rs.18,200/- on 28.10.2009, Rs.37,600/- on 10.12.2009, Rs.19,000/- on 19.02.2010 and 22.02.2010, Rs.38,000/- on 12.04.2010, Rs.19,000/- on 26.04.2010 and 28.04.2010, Rs.17,760/- on 29.06.2010, Rs.36,400/- and Rs.36,400/- on 31.07.2010. After 31.07.2010, the complainant did not repay even a single penny to the opposite party after adjusting all the abovesaid amounts paid by the complainant, the amount of Rs.2,95,150/- is due as out standing of balance installments, Rs.27,624/- as overdue interest; Rs.25,995/- as insurance charges and Rs.500/- other misc. expenses and thus a total sum of Rs.3,49,269/- is still due and outstanding against the complainant. The complainant has not deposited Rs.6,69,950/- with the opposite party and he has not deposited Rs.1,42,150/- in excess with the opposite party and a sum of Rs.3,49,269/- is still due and out standing against the complainant which the opposite party is entitled to recover from the complainant, until and unless the said amount is paid by the complainant no NOC can be issued by the opposite party. The opposite party is also not liable to refund any amount to the complainant.

3. Parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

4. Arguments heard. Record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.

5. The complainant has taken loan of Rs.5,90,000/- from the opposite party for purchasing one vehicle Tata LPT 1109 which was to be returned in 47 monthly installments of Rs.18,200/- each for vehicle No.HR 46-B/6456. The learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the opposite party has obtained the signatures of the complainant on various blank papers. No agreement deed or repayment schedule was ever supplied to the complainant. The complainant had issued 47 post dated cheques of Rs.18,200/- each to the opposite party for all the installments and the opposite party under took that they would present the cheques to realize the installments. The complainant had purchased this vehicle for earning his livelihood and for self employment. The vehicle purchased by the complainant was second hand vehicle, he paid 29 installments of Rs.18,200/-. A rough calculation of 29 installments is Rs.5,27,800/- but the complainant has deposited Rs.6,69,000/- he has deposited all these installments in cash. The opposite party has not presented the post dated cheques of installments and had also charged late payment charges from the complainant. In this way, the complainant had deposited Rs.1,42,150/- in excess. The complainant had requested the opposite party to adjust Rs.1,42,150/- and to issue NOC after getting the amount due deposited from him but the opposite party refused to adjust the said amount and to get the remaining amount deposited from him.

6. The learned counsel for the opposite party has submitted that as per repayment schedule, the first installment was of Rs.18,208/- and the remaining 46 installments were of Rs.18,202/- each. The opposite party has neither obtained 47 cheques from the complainant nor obtained his signatures on any blank paper. The complainant has executed all the documents voluntarily. The complainant had to pay the amount of Rs. 5,27,800/- where as he has to deposit Rs.2,95,150/- as due and outstanding balance of installments, Rs.27,624/- as overdue interest; Rs.25,995/- as insurance charges and Rs.500/- as other miscellaneous expenses and a total sum of Rs.3,49,269/- is still due and outstanding against the complainant. Neither the complainant has deposited Rs.3,49,269/- as outstanding charges nor has paid Rs.1,42,150/- as excess to the opposite party.

7. The learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that he had already paid Rs.6,69,950/-, whereas, he had to deposit only Rs. 5,27,800/- and had paid Rs.1,42,150/- in excess. He requested the opposite party to adjust the excess amount of Rs.1,42,150/- in his account and to take the remaining charges from him and issue him NOC after adjusting the excess amount in his future installments and waiving off the interest on the remaining further installments.

8. As per version of the opposite party, the complainant had deposited only Rs.5,60,350/- as per Ex.R-2 and the balance amount is Rs.2,95,150/- and the total balance of net recoverable amount is Rs.3,49,269/-. The learned counsel for the complainant during arguments, argued that the opposite party has not made entries of few payments in their account statement. After minutely perusing the evidence placed on file, it has been observed that the receipt dated 18.02.2009 Ex.C-3 is duplicate receipt of Ex.C-2; Ex.C-5 dated 31.05.2008 is duplicate receipt of Ex.C-4; Ex.C-22 is duplicate receipt of Ex.C-21 and similarly, Ex.C-26 dated 25.08.2008 is duplicate receipt of Ex.C-25. It has been clearly mentioned on these receipts that these receipts are issued in lieu of voucher of their original receipts. So, the contention of the complainant that he has paid more Rs.1,42,150/- to the opposite party is not tenable. When the complainant has not deposited all the installments there is no question of issuance of the NOC/No Due Certificate by the opposite party. Hence, this complaint fails.

9. In view of what has been discussed above, this Forum is of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Thus, this complaint is dismissed without any order as to cost.

10. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned for record. '

Pronounced in open Forum

11-02-2011

(Vikramjit Kaur Soni)

President

(Dr. Phulinder Preet)

Member

(Amarjeet Paul)

Member