Orissa

Jajapur

CC/51/2013

Sri Samarendra Sahoo - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shri Ram Transport Finance Co.Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sripata Majumdar

15 Jul 2015

ORDER

                       IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.

                                                                     Present:  1.Shri Biraja Prasad Kar, President.

                                                                                     2.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,

                                                                                     3. Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member. 

Dated the 15 th day of July,2015.

C.C.Case No.51 of 2013

Sri Samarendra Sahoo, S/O.Late Manoj Ku.Sahoo

Vill. Ampolaba,  Via. Sukinda   

P.S.-Sukinda,Dist. Jajpur.                                    ……………..Complainant .                                                                                                                                         (Versus)

Sriram Transport Finance Co.Ltd,1^st floor near ,Saraswati Talkies ,infront of

Kalinga Xavier Hostel By pass Road,Jajpur Road,Dist.Jajpur.…………………………Opp.Party.             

For the Complainant:                  Sri  P.K.Ray , R.K. Mohanty, Advocates.

For the Opp.Party     :                Sri  MR. Jyoti Patnaik, R.K.Sahu, Advocates

                                                                                   Date of order:  15.07. 2015

MISS SMITA  RAY , LADY MEMBER.

                        Deficiency in service is the grievance of the complainant.

                        Briefly stated, the facts of the complainant’s case are that the complainant to eke out his livelihood purchased a pre owned vehicle bearing Regd. No.0R-04F-2374 under the financial assistance of the O.P. under an agreement. As per agreement the complainant was paying his EMIs regularly. The original documents i.e R.C book, Road permit, fitness certificate, Insurance paper ,Road tax receipts and National permit of the alleged vehicle were found missing when the vehicle was returning from Kaliapani after loading. Hence, the complainant reported the matter at Sukinda P.S and it has been entered  in the P.S vide S.D.E No.347 dt.14.03.11 . Due to the missing of the above documents the complainant could not able to ply the vehicle and earn money. The complainant ventilated his grievance before the O.P. and could not pay the installments. It is alleged by the complainant that the O.P. without giving any prior notice seized the vehicle which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. , for which the complainant has filed this dispute with the prayer to direct the O.P. to return the vehicle to the complainant and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant towards mental agony

and litigation expenses.

                        The complainant in support of his case has filed the zerox copy of the payment receipts and zerox copy of the S.D.E No.3471 dt.14.03.2011 .

                        On being  noticed the O.P. appeared through their advocate and filed their written version denying the allegations made in the complaint petition. The O.P. pleaded in the written version that the complainant availed loan of Rs.7,20,000/- from the STFC Ltd. in respect of the vehicle bearing Regd. No.0R-04F-2374 for which Loan-Cum-Hypothecation agreement was executed on 31.08.2010 between the Financier and borrower bearing Agreement No.JJPUR0008300004. Under the aforesaid agreement, the complainant became liable to repay the sum of Rs.11,79,757/- which amount includes the amount advanced and financial charges and the aforesaid sum was payable in 47 monthly installments @ Rs.27,457/- for the 1^st installments and @ Rs.25,050/- each for the rest 46 installments period of payment commenced from 05.10.2010 till expiry on 05.08.2014.

                        The statement of account pertaining to the aforesaid loan agreement reveals that as on 13.07.2011, the complainant paid Rs.2,28,282/- and installment dues remained outstanding at Rs.9,51,475/-. Besides that there was delay payment charges of Rs.30.403/- balance dues towards expenses Rs.2,71,273/- ,Insurance dues of Rs.29,501/- personal loan dues of Rs.56,340/- . After adjustment of amount received towards sale value i.e Rs.3,35,000/- the sum of Rs.10,03,992/- remained as outstanding as on 30.04.2013.

                        As the complainant is a chronic defaulter in paying the EMIs the alleged vehicle was repossessed on 31.10.2011 with  pre and post intimation to the police under whose limit such repossession was made . Thereafter pre sale notice was issued to the complainant and guarantor providing opportunity to clear the outstanding dues and the same also yield no response. Since the vehicle was repossessed on 31.10.2011 and was exposed to vagaries of weather whereby it’s look and condition gradually deteriorated and market value reduced day by day, and on the contrary, the complainant did not show any interest to take back the vehicle upon clearing the outstanding dues, it was thought appropriate to sell the vehicle in order to get best possible price. Accordingly, the vehicle was sold to one Md. Fakruddin on 23.02.2013 for a consideration of Rs.3,35,000/- and thereafter ,shortfall notice was sent to the borrower and guarantor on 04.04.2012 by regd. Post.

                        In support of the case of the O.P. has filed (i) zerox copy of the Loan-cum-Hypothecation Agreement  (ii) zerox copy of the statement of account as on 30.04.13 (iii) zerox copy of the shortfall notice (iv) zerox copy of the default notices (v) zerox copy of the pre-repossession intimation to the police station (vi) zerox copy of the post repossession (vii) zerox copy of the Telegram receipts dt.1.11.2011 (viii) zerox copy of the pre sale notice addressed to

complainant and guarantor (ix) zerox copy of the Insurance policy for the year 2011-2012 and 2012-13 .

                        We have heard the learned counsel for the parties on the date of hearing ,perused the pleadings and documents available on record.

                        From the pleadings and documents available on record it is clear that the complainant has waddled out of the commitments made by him to the O.P in paying the EMIs.

Further more, in a recent authority reported in Surya Pal Singh Vs. Siddha Vinayak Motors & Another, reported in III(2012) CPJ-4-(SC) the Supreme Court was pleased to hold :

“Under the Hire purchase Agreement, it is the financier who is the owner of the vehicle and the person who takes the loan retain the vehicle only as a bailee/ trustee,therefore, taking possession of the vehicle on the ground of non-payment of installment has always been upheld to be a legal right of the financier.

This Court vide it judgement in Trilok singh & Ors. Vs. Satya Deo Tripathi, AIR-1979-SC-850: has categorically held that under the Hire Purchase Agreement, the financier is the real owner of the vehicle, therefore, there can not be any allegation against him for having the possession of the vehicle. This view was again reiterated in K.A Mathai @ Babu & Anr. Vs.Kora  Bibikutty &Anr 1996(7)-SCC-212, Charanjit Singh Chadha & Ors.Vs. Sudhir Mehra 2001(7)-SCC-417, following the earlier judgement of this court  in Sundaram Finance Ltd, Vs. The State of Kerala & Anr AIR-1966-SC-1178 ,Smt Lalmuni Devi V. State Of Bihar & Ors 2001(2) SCC-17 and Balwinder Singh V.Asstt. Commissioner,2005(4)-SCC-146 .

                        More over, the O.P. had issued Regd.pre sale notice to the complainant and guarantor before selling the vehicle. Hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.

                        In view of the above decisions the present C.C. Case is liable to be dismissed.

                                                                        O R D E R

                 Consequently, the complaint petition has no merit ,therefore the same is hereby dismissed . There shall be no order as to costs.            

                        This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 15th  day of July ,2015. under my hand and seal of the Forum.

 

               

                                                                                                                      (Miss Smita Ray )

                                                                                                                       Lady Member.

(Shri Biraja Prasad Kar)                                                           Typed to my dictation & corrected by me                                             

         President.                                                                       

 

 

                                                                                                           (Miss Smita Ray)

(Shri Pitabas Mohanty )                                                                               Lady Member.

      Member.