DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA.<br /> CC.No.298 of 19.10.2009<br /> Decided on 08.04.2010<br /> Ramesh Goyal son of Sant Ram, 666, Main Road, Paras Ram Nagar, Bathinda.<br /> ........Complainant.<br /> Versus<br /> Shri Ram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. having its office at 2765-B, Ist Floor, above Amway, Tinkoni Chowk, GT Road, Bathinda, through its Manager Pawan Kumar.<br /> ........Opposite parties.<br /> <br /> Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> QUORUM<br /> <br /> Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.<br /> Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member<br /> Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member.<br /> <br /> Present:-<br /> For the Complainant : Sh. Sanjay Goyal, counsel for the complainant.<br /> For the Opposite party : Sh. J.S.Kohli, counsel for opposite party.<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-<br /> <br /> 1. In brief, the complainant's case is that he took a loan from opposite party to purchase two trucks. He purchased two trucks bearing Nos. PB-03P-9336 and PB-03P-8610 respectively to earn his livelihood. On 16.09.2009, when he was going to his destination alongwith his two vehicles the opposite party through his manager Pawan Kumar alongwith five Gunda type persons who were armed with gun and knives forcibly stopped the abovesaid vehicles and illegally took possession of the said vehicles. There was original Registration Certificates, insurance cover note, tape recorders, one mobile phone of Nokia make, model N-17 and Rs.1,700/- as cash which were never returned by the officials of opposite party to the complainant. The complainant reported this matter to SSP (Senior Superintendent of Police), Bathinda but he did not held any inquiry. The opposite party demanded money from the complainant and it was also blackmailing and harassing the complainant that if he file any complaint before higher officials of police then he would be punished by the officials of opposite party. Due to adamant attitude of the opposite party he has pleaded that the opposite party be directed to pay the amount of Rs.8 lacs for each vehicle alongwith interest @ 9% P.A. and to pay Rs.40,000/- as compensation for mental harassment and agony suffered by him alongwith Rs.5,500/- as cost of litigation expenses.<br /> 2. The opposite party pleaded that the complainant took a loan from them to purchase the vehicles in question. The loan amount was to be returned in 47 equal monthly installments for both the vehicles bearing Nos. PB-03P-9336 and PB-03P-8610 but the complainant failed to make the payment of monthly installments of loan account. He has paid only a few installments regarding vehicle No. PB-03P-9336 and only five installments regarding vehicle No. PB-03P-8610. The opposite party did not take illegal and forcible possession of the vehicles in question from the complainant. The complainant through his drivers Gurmail Singh and Balbir Singh surrendered the vehicles in question on 14.09.2009 and 16.09.2009 and intimation regarding the same was given by opposite party to Police Station, Talwandi Bhai and the said drivers duly signed the requisite documents in this regard in token of surrender of possession of vehicles in question. The complainant committed default in repayment of loan amount and the opposite party issued the notices to the complainant as well as his guaranter to regularize the account but the complainant failed to settle the account. So, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and complaint is liable to be dismissed.<br /> 3. In order to prove his allegations the complainant has placed on file his affidavit dated 12.12.2009 Ex.C-1, affidavits of Sh. Arun Kumar and Sh. Gurmeet Singh dated 02.03.2010 Ex.C-5 and Ex.C-6, photocopy of notice dated 08.07.2008 Ex.C-2, photocopy of R.C. of vehicle No. PB-03P-9336 vide Ex.C-3 and photocopy of letter alongwith postal receipt Ex.C-4.<br /> 4. To controvert the evidence of the complainant, opposite party filed affidavit of Sh. Natha Singh, Branch Manager dated 12.03.2010 Ex.R-1, photocopies of account statements Ex.R-2, Ex.R-17, photocopies of Notice for sale Ex.R-3 & Ex.R-4, photocopies of Inventory Ex.R-5 and Ex.R-29, photocopies of letter Ex.R-6, Ex.R-11 to Ex.R-14, Ex.R-24 to Ex.R-27 and Ex.R-30, photocopies of Notices Ex.R-8, Ex.R-10, Ex.R-19, Ex.R-22, Ex.R-31 and Ex.R-33, photocopies of postal receipts Ex.R-7, Ex.R-9, Ex.R-20 to Ex.R-22, and Ex.R-32, photocopies of R.C. of vehicles in question Ex.R-15 and Ex.R-34, photocopy of Insurance Cover Note Ex.R-16, photocopy of Intimation to police Ex.R-28 and photocopy of Power of attorney Ex.R-35. <br /> 5. Arguments heard. The complainant contended that he is owner of two trucks No. PB-03P-9336 and PB-03P-8610 and both the vehicles were purchased by opposite party on 16.09.2009. The abovesaid vehicles were going to their destination loaded with goods and were stopped by Pawan Kumar alongwith five Gunda type persons, who were armed with gun and knives forcibly stopped the abovesaid trucks alongwith cash of Rs.1,700/- and one mobile phone make Nokia N-17. Both the vehicles were having new tyres and new batteries which were installed one month back. The complainant has made a complaint to SSP (Senior Superintendent of Police), Bathinda on 22.09.2009 but he did not hold any inquiry to the matter and due to the influence of opposite party no action was taken. He further contended that the complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act (NIA) was filed by opposite party. He has prayed that the opposite party should pay the amount of Rs.8 lacs alongwith interest.<br /> 6. On contrary, the opposite party pleaded that since the complainant had not paid the loan amount back with respect to the above mentioned trucks and the opposite party has served the legal notices to the complainant for repayment of loan amount and to settle the account but the complainant failed to settle the account and then the complainant with his free will and voluntarily surrendered the possession of the vehicles to the concerned officials of the opposite party through their drivers named Gurmail Singh and Balvir Singh, at Police Station, Talwandi Bhai on 14.09.2009 and 16.09.2009. The intimation in this regard was also given by concerned officials of the opposite party to the Police Station on 14.09.2009 and 16.09.2009 respectively. The inventory regarding both the vehicles was also prepared at the time of taking possession which was also signed by above mentioned drivers Gurmail Singh and Balvir Singh.<br /> 7. The opposite party further pleaded that earlier the complainant had settled one loan account as full and final and agreed to make the payment of settlement amount in lump sum. Accordingly, the complainant issued a cheque in favour of opposite party. The said cheque was also dishonoured by the bank. The complainant tendered the affidavit of Sh. Arun Kumar vide Ex. C-5 and Sh. Gurmeet Singh vide Ex.C-6, who were posing themselves as drivers of above mentioned vehicles. At that time when their trucks incepted by the opposite party and further repeated the version of the complainant. It is matter of great surprise that complainant has nothing mentioned in his complaint about the alleged drivers and moreover it had not been clarified from whom mobile phone Nokia N-17 and Rs.1,700/- were snatched. Moreover, nothing has been mentioned regarding the status of outstanding loan amount by the complainant. Moreover it is the duty of the loanee to repay the loan amount and if he fails to do so,the financer has the right to adopt legal way to recover due loan amount. <br /> 8. It is clear from Ex.R-2 that an amount of Rs.9.7lacs is standing against truck bearing No. PB-03P-8610 dated 24.10.2006, which has to be returned in equal 47 monthly installments of Rs. 25,800/- each out of which the complainant had only paid five installments. After that nothing has been paid by the complainant. As per Ex.R-17 the opposite party has financed Rs.9.7lacs dated 30.09.2006 for truck bearing No. PB-03P-9336. This loan amount was also to be returned in equal 47 monthly installments of Rs. 25,500/- each. In this case also, the complainant had paid only 7 installments. The opposite party has issued different notices for default in payment of the installments due to the complainant who is borrower and to guarantor named Ajit Singh but the complainant could not make the payment. Therefore, he has surrendered the vehicles of the opposite party at their offices at Talwandi Bhai through their drivers and intimation in this respect was given to the concerned police station vide Ex.R-28 and Ex.R-30 and after that the final notices for Sale of vehicle Ex.R-31 and Ex.R-33 were served. <br /> 9. In view of the above discussion, this Forum is of the considered view that the complainant is duty bound to pay the loan amount but he failed to do so and have surrendered the vehicles to the opposite party. The false story has been concocted by the complainant to make the complaint. Therefore, the complaint is hereby dismissed without any order as to cost.<br /> 10. The copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned for record. '<br /> <br /> <br /> Pronounced (VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI)<br /> 08.04.2010 PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> (DR. PHULINDER PREET)<br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> ` (AMARJEET PAUL)<br /> MEMBER <br />