( Passed on dated 26th February, 2016 )
Per Shri Atul D. Alsi – Hon’ble President.
The registration and other necessary documents for the refinanced vehicle were not given to complainant after several demands hence for the negligency of service the present complaint has been filed with a prayer to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/-.
2. The story in short as under:-
The vehicle bearing No. MH-40/4706 TATA-ACE bearing Engine No. 2751/DI05KUZ51180 was purchased by obtaining finance of Rs.1,50,000/- from O. P. vide loan agreement No. GNDO-102240010 and repayment agreed by complainant was Rs.5976 monthly installments of 40 months.
3. The complainant has paid first installment of Rs.21,680/- and in December, 2013 Rs.4,900/-. As per complaint the complainant has paid Rs.1,60,000/- to O. P. till now. But the O.P. did not provide the registration book of vehicle hence the complainant could not play his vehicle on road. The complainant at several times demanded the necessary documents of vehicle but it were not provided hence prayed that O.P. are liable to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- and forum has jurisdiction to evaluate the claim as the payment of installment were made at Gondia.
4. The complaint was registered and issued notice to O. Ps.
5. The O.P. appeared and filed preliminary objection as to maintainability of complaint. The O. P. admitted the loan transaction and submitted that as per clause 15 of agreement the dispute of loan transaction was referred to sole arbitrator and after service of notice of arbitration and further adjudication of claim the Arbitration Award was passed on 25/11/2014. The copy of award had been sent to complainant. The award was passed on 25/11/2014 and the present complaint was filed on 18/02/2015 on the same issue hence it is not maintainable hence the complaint may be dismissed with cost against opposite parties as per version in reply.
6. The complainant filed seven documents as per list of documents at Exh.5.
7. The O. Ps. have filed five documents as per list and documents at Exh.8.
8. The counsel for complainant had not filed its say on preliminary objection to the maintainability of complaint after several chances were given.
9. The counsel for O.P. argued that when the matter was wholly and substantially decided in Arbitration case and which is the subject matter of subsequent litigation that means in the present complaint case hence the present complaint case is not maintainable and deserve to be dismissed with cost.
10. After hearing and going through the complaint and reply the following points came for consideration.
Sr. No. | Points | Findings |
1. | Whether the complaint is maintainable? | NO |
2. | What Order? | As per final order. |
REASONING & FINDINGS
11. The complainant has filed the present complaint case in respect of refinanced vehicle loan of Rs.1,50,000/- from the opposite parties.
12. As per loan agreement clause 15 the Hon’ble Arbitrator was appointed and Arbitrator was pleased to pass an Arbitration Award on 25/11/2014. The subject matter in respect of vehicle financed by O.P. was wholly and substantially decided in Arbitration case and which is the subject matter of present complainant’s case hence when the subject matter of one case is decided wholly and substantially in previous matter no subsequent case can be entertained on same fact and circumstances hence the Forum can’t entertain the complaint and complaint is deserves to be dismissed on the ground of maintainability. Hence, the following order is passed.
-: ORDER :-
1. The complainant’s case is dismissed on the ground of maintainability as a preliminary objection.
2. No order as to costs.
