Rajasthan

StateCommission

FA/2/2014

Desraj Yadav S/o sh. Patram Yadav - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. Through Manager - Opp.Party(s)

D.M. Mathur

05 May 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR BENCH NO.1

 

FIRST APPEAL NO: 02/2014

 

Deshraj Yadav r/o village Loghadi, Post Padisal Tehsil & Distt. Alwar

Vs.

Sriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. Office Roshan Tower, Near Krishi Upaj Mandi, Alwar & ors.

 

 

Date of Order 5.5.2015

 

Before:

Hon'ble Mr.Vinay Kumar Chawla-Presiding Member

Mrs.Sunita Ranka -Member

Mr.Kailash Soyal- Member

 

Mr. D.M.Mathur counsel for the appellant

Mr. Puneet Sharma counsel for the respondent no.1

Mr.Yashdeep Singh counsel for respondent no.2

None present on behalf of respondent no.3

 

 

2

 

BY THE STATE COMMISSION

 

This appeal has been filed against the judgment of learned

DCF Alwar dated 31.10.2013 by which it dismissed the complaint.

 

Brief facts giving rise to this dispute are that the complainant had taken a finance of Rs. 3,46,896/- on a taxi car purchased by him. After paying seven instalments of Rs. 13,073/- each the car was stolen. A theft claim was lodged with the Insurance Company and the insurance company paid a sum of Rs.4,85,589/- to the finance company. After adjusting the amount received by way of seven instalments and the amount received from the insurance company the financier had received Rs. 1,32,364.11 in excess. The financier's case is that they tried to refund this amount to the complainant but he refused to accept it. On the other hand the complainant had alleged that a sum of Rs.2,00,704/- were due to him.

 

We have heard the arguments and perused the statement of account. On perusal of the account we are satisfied that the respondents have placed a correct account statement of the complainant. The complainant has been given interest rebate as

3

 

amount was received from the insurance company in lumpsum on theft of the vehicle. The complainant has not been able to prove how Rs. 2,00,704/- was due. At the same time the respondents have not been able to prove that they had sent a cheque of Rs.1,32,364.11 to the complainant which was refused.

 

In view of this we partially allow this appeal and direct the respondent no.1 to refund the above amount to the complainant alongwith interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of complaint. A sum of Rs.5100/- will be paid as cost of the complaint.

 

 

Member Member Presiding Member

 

 

nm

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.