Orissa

Cuttak

CC/9/2021

Priyambada Senapati - Complainant(s)

Versus

Tata Capital Financial Service Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

P K Muduli

13 Oct 2022

ORDER

            IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                                                                C.C.No.9/2021

Priyambada Senapati,

D/O:Late Bhagyadhar Senapati,

Vill:Balipada,PO/PS:Nandankanan,

Dist:Khurda,

At present residing C/o:Nuapada,

P.O/P.S:Madhupatna,Dist:Cuttack.                                       ... Complainant.

 

                                                Vrs.

1.        Ratna Sagar-Collection Manager,

Tata Capital Financial Service Ltd.,

At:3^rd Floor,Plot No.190,204,205,

Opp. Gouri Temple,Lewis Road,

P.S:Badagada Rd.,Bhubaneswar,

Dist:Khurda,Odisha-751074.

 

2.       Tata Capital Financial Service Ltd.,

At:3^rd Floor,Plot No.190,204,205,

            Opp. Gouri Temple,Lewis Road,

P.S:Badagada Rd.

Having its Registered office-11^th Floor,Tower-‘A’,

Peninsuila Business Park,

Ganpatrao Kadam Marg,Lower Parel,

Mumbai-400013,India.

 

3.      Sai Parking Service,

At:Manguli Chhak,P.S:Choudwar,Dist:Cuttack,

Bilteruan NH-5,Manguli,Hrianta,

Cuttack-754025(Opp. Nirgundi Rly-station).... Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:               Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    13.01.2021

Date of Order:   13.10.2022

 

For the complainant:          Mr. P.K.Muduly,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps               :                 None.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President.             

Case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition in nutshell is that she owns the motorcycle/scooty bearing Regd. No.OD-33T-2387 by obtaining finance from the O.Ps to the tune of Rs.56,000/-.  She had agreed to repay the said loan amount in equal monthly instalments but due to the pandemic situation some of the outstanding amounts were pending which were overdue.  The complainant has stated to be availing the moratorium period as per the RBI guidelines and had requested the O.P no.1 for allowing her some more time in order to close her loan account but on 22.12.20 at about 11.45 A.M, the said motorcycle/scooty belonging to the complainant was forcibly taken away by the O.Ps while it was being plied on the Ring Road hear Khannagar Kalimandir.  The complainant had approached the O.P No.1 on 31.12.20 seeking time but was not cooperated in that aspect.  The complainant in her complaint petition has further mentioned that though he had borrowed a loan of Rs.56,000/- in the month of June,2018, in the meanwhile she had already paid an amount of Rs.60,000/- to the O.Ps.  She has further alleged that there was a cash of Rs.4,800/- kept inside the dicky of the said vehicle alongwith some other valuable documents and those were all stolen away while the vehicle was kept at Sai Parking Pvt. Ltd. area  after being taken away from her possession.  The left side backlight of the said vehicle found to be broken also.  Thus, the complainant had to file this case seeking direction to the O.Ps for submitting the connecting records to return the stolen cash of Rs.4800/- and the other valuable documents.  She has further prayed to get from the O.Ps cash of Rs.15,000/- alongwith a compensation amount of Rs.50,000/- and has further prayed for any other reliefs as deemed fit and proper.

            The complainant has filed copies of certain documents in order to prove her case.

2.         Having not contested this case, the O.Ps are set exparte vide order dt.7.4.22.

3.         The points for determination in this case are as follows:

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable ?

            ii.         Whether the O.Ps were deficient in their service towards the complainant ?

            iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed ?

Issue no.ii.

            Point no.ii being the pertinent one is taken up first for consideration here in this case.  Admittedly, the complainant had obtained a loan to the tune of Rs.56,000/- as mentioned by her and had thereby entered into an agreement with the O.Ps in order to repay the same in 36 number of instalments @ Rs.2203/- which is well evident from the copy of the loan-cum-hypothecation guarantee agreement as filed by the complainant.  The claim of the complainant that she had already paid to the O.Ps a sum of Rs.60,000/- but while perusing the copies of the bank statement as filed by the complainant herself, it is noticed that she had only paid 7 to 8 number of instalments @ Rs.2203/-.  So her claim appears to be incorrect and she has not approached this Commission with clean hand. Her statement that she is availing the moratorium period is also not supported with any documents.  Moreso, her claim as regards to the RBI guidelines also lacks any supportive documentary evidence. Law is well settled by our Hon’ble Apex Court that when the borrower has entered into a hypothecation agreement with the financier he is bound by the terms and conditions and breach of those will definitely entitle the financier to repossess the financed vehicle. Hon’ble Apex Court has also decided in the case of Bharathi Knitting Company Vrs. DHL Waorldwide Express Courier (1996) 4 SCC 704 wherein it is held that when the complainant signs the contract documents, he is bound by it’s terms and conditions and the onus would be on him to prove the terms and the circumstances in which he had signed the contract.   From the settled position of law this Commission after perusing the available materials on record finds that there was no deficiency in service noticed on the part of the O.Ps.   

Points no.i & iii.

            From the above discussions, it can never be said here that the case of the complainant is maintainable and that he is entitled to any of the reliefs as claimed by her. Hence it is so ordered;

                                                            ORDER

            Case is dismissed against the O.Ps and as regards to the facts and circumstances of the case without any cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 13^th day of   October,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.           

                                                                                                                                Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President

                       

                                                                                                                                                             Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                                             Member