(Per Shri S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member)
(1) This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 24/03/2011 in Consumer Complaint No.193/2009, Shri Baburao Shivappa Sindagi Vs. Shriram Transport Finance Co.Ltd., passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Solapur (‘Forum’ in short).
(2) It is the case of deficiency in service on the part of the appellant/original opponent, Shri Ram Transport Finance Co.Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “finance company”) for not hading over the goods truck purchased for business of transport after taking loan from it. The forum upheld the contention of the complainant and directed the finance company to hand over the possession of the truck and further gave direction rescheduling the loan repayment EMIs etc. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the finance company preferred this appeal. It is submitted at Bar that the respondent has not preferred any appeal.
(3) At the time of hearing, the question arose when the counsel for the appellant tried to refer various papers and previous statements made in the complaint, as to whether the same is tendered in evidence or not. Simultaneously, it was found that the complainant comes with a statement in his complaint that he has entered into the transaction in question for purchasing the truck for his business but failed to show/allege circumstances.
(4) Short issue involved in the dispute is that after purchasing the truck, it remained all the while in the godown of the finance company and the request of the complainant for the possession of the truck was denied and delayed. The finance company did not part with defacto possession of the truck on the pretext that their name is to be incorporated in the registration book of the vehicle. The deficiency in service on part of the finance company is alleged accordingly. Taking into the consideration above referred aspects in view of provisions of Section 13 (4) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986; it is submitted ultimately on behalf of both the parties that the matter be remanded back to the forum so that they will get an opportunity to tender evidence and it will meet ends of the ultimate justice. We find it proper and just to accept their submission. Holding accordingly, we pass the following order.
ORDER
(1) Appeal is allowed.
(2) Order dated 24/03/2011 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the forum in the light of observations made in the body of this order. Both the parties are directed to appear before the District Forum, Solapur on 08/01/2013. thereupon, amendment application(s), if any, if filed by either of the parties, be decided on their own merit and thereafter after hearing both the parties the dispute be settled according to the law. Trial of the dispute be expedited.
(3) In the given circumstances, no order as to costs.
Pronounced on 29th November, 2012.
