Orissa

Rayagada

CC/167/2017

Rasmitha Sahu - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sriram Transport Finance Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Self

24 Feb 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    COMMISSION, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA.

C.C. Case  No.  167 / 2017.                                          Date.  24      .     02  . 2021

P R E S E N T .

.

Sri  Gadadhara  Sahu,                                           President

Smt. Padmalaya  Mishra,                                     Member.

 

Smt. Rasmitha  Sahu, W/O: Prasanna Kumar  Sahu, At:Bankili, Po:Minajhola,   Dist:Rayagada,  765 001  (Odisha)                                                                                                                                                                                …. Complainant.

Versus.

1.The  Manager.  Shriram Transport Finance Company  Ltd., 101-105, Ist. Floor, Shiv Chambers, Sector -11, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai- 400614.

.                                                                       .…..Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:                         

For the complainant: - Sri  L.M. Patnaik, Advocate.

For the O.Ps:- Exparte.

 

JUDGEMENT

The  crux of the case is that  the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps    for  non refund of insurance amount a sum of Rs.9,690/- which was deducted unnecessarily  for which  the complainant  sought for redressal of the grievances raised by the complainant.

Upon  Notice, the O.Ps neither entering in to appear before the forum nor filed their  written version inspite of more than  18 adjournments has been given  to them. Complainant consequently filed his memo and prayer to set exparte of the O.Ps.  Observing lapses of around 2 years  for which the objectives  of the legislature of the C.P. Act going to be destroyed to the prejudice of the interest of the complainant.  Hence after hearing  the  counsel for the complainant set the case  exparte against the O.Ps. The action of the O.Ps is against the principles of  natural justice as envisaged  in the C.P. Act. Hence the O.Ps. set exparte  as the statutory period  for filing of  written version was over to close the case with in the time frame permitted by the C.P. Act.

We therefore constrained to  proceed to dispose of the case, on its merit.  Heard from the learned counsel for the  complainant.   We perused the complaint petition and the document filed by the complainant.

                                                Findings.

Undisputedly  the complainant had  availed   finance  from the O.Ps  for purchase of  Tractor  bearing  Regd. No. OD-18-B-3599- model  John Deere-5042 bearing  loan account No. PARVA050710001.  There is no dispute the  complainant  insured the above vehicle  with the Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.,  vide policy No. 6010262343000362 and the said  policy  was valid  till 29^th. August, 2017.  Undisputedly the  O.Ps had  intentionally   withdrawn the amount a sum of Rs.14,858/- from the  account of the complainant  on Dt. 2.12.2016 towards   the  aforesaid insurance of the  complainants  Tractor.   Undisputedly  the   O.Ps  had  refunded  a sum of Rs.5,168/-  to the complainant  as revealed  from the account statement  issued by  the O.P.(copies of the  same  is enclosed herewith  which is marked as  Annexure-I).

The main grievance  of the complainant is that  due to non  refund of  balance  insurance amount a sum of Rs.9,690/-  to the complainant he filed this case before this  District Commission. Hence this C.C. case.

During the course of  hearing  the complainant put  forth   the  insurance paper  which  was   deposited by the  complainant  for the period  from  30^th. August, 2016 to 29^th. August, 2017 (copies   of the same is   available   in the file which is marked as Annexure- 2).

The  O.Ps despite notice did not attend or filed  Written version  controverting  the allegation of the complainant.

On perusal  of the account   statement   of the O.Ps  it is revealed that  the  O.Ps had deducted  a sum of Rs.14,858/- on Dt. 2.12.2016  from the account  of the  complainant  towards  coverage of insurance  to the above  vehicle,  where as  the complainant  had already   obtained the  insurance  policy  for the period from  30^th. August, 2016 to  29^th  August, 2016  vide policy No. 6010262343000362.

Further  on perusal of the account statement the O.Ps had refunded a sum  of Rs.5,168.00 to the complainant  on Dt. 21.3.2017   but till date the O.Ps had  not refund the balance amount a sum  of Rs. 9,690/-. 

The  O.Ps have every right to earn profit from its customer, but it should  be reasonable or  acceptable one.  The O.Ps should not be a commercial  business centres for profiteering  from the exploitation of such type customer.

At  this stage this forum observed   the interest of justice  would met if   the complainant is entitled    to recovery of Rs. . 9,690/-   from the O.Ps. 

       To meet the ends of justice the following  order is passed.

                                                            ORDER.

            In the result the  complaint petition is allowed in part on exparte.

            The O.Ps are ordered to  refund  a sum of Rs. 9,690/-   to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.  Parties are left to bear their own cost.

            Dictated and corrected by me.

Pronounced   on this    24^th. Day of  February, 2020

 

                                    Member.                                                      President.