DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: BHADRAK : (ODISHA).
Consumer Complaint No.115 of 2022.
Date of hearing : 03.06.2024.
Date of order : 16.07.2024.
Dated the 16th day of July 2024.
Rukshar Khatoon, C/o:- Sk. Wasim Akhtar Quadri,
Vill:-Sankarpur, Po/P.S:- Puruna Bazar, Dist:- Bhadrak, Odisha.
. . . . . Complainant.
Vrs.
- Tata Motors Finance Limited,
At:-Keshari Talkies Complex, 1st Floor, No. 98,
Unit-3, Kharavel Nagar, Bhubaneswar.
- Tata Motor Finance Limited,
Bombay House, 24 Homi Mody Street,
Hutatma Chowk, Mumbai, Pin-400001.
- The Registering Authority,
OMVD, Chandikhole, At/Po/PS:-Chandikhole,
Dist:-Jajpur.
. . . . Opp. Parties.
P R E S E N T S.
1. Sri Shiba Prasad Mohanty, President,
2. Smt. Madhusmita Swain, Member.
Counsels appeared for the parties.
Counsel for Complainant: Sri Debasis Nayak, Advocate& Associate.
Counsel for O.P. No.1 & 2: Sri P.K. Mishra, Advocate& Associates.
Counsel for O.P. No. 3 : In person.
J U D G M E N T.
SRI SHIBA PRASAD MOHANTY, PRESIDENT.
In the matter of an application filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service against the Opposite Parties under Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
A fact of the case is that, the complainant is a qualified unemployed person for her self-employment she has purchased the case vehicle with financial assistance from the O.P.No.1 & 2. Being satisfied with the proposal of the complainant, the O.Ps decided to advance for the sum of Rs.34,98,325/- vide Contract No. 5003432645, dtd.13.08.2020 & the complainant would repay the loan dues on 58 monthly installments, 1st installment being Rs.25,110/-, 2nd installments being Rs.25,000/- & other 56 monthly installments being Rs.88,250/-. The tenure of the agreement period is from 11.10.2020 to 11.07.2025. The loan was sanctioned by the O.Ps & the TATA LPT 4225 BSIV 10X2 vehicle vide Regd. No. OD-04-Q-5411, Engine No. B67B6A250DO2102F64121224 & Chassis No. MAT793002L1G02075 was given to the complainant. The complainant was not agreed for Health, Wellness & Life insurance of O.P.No.1 & 2 but the O.Ps compelled to take the insurance policies arbitrarily worth of Rs.60,325/- even though earlier complainant has taken other insurance policies regarding Health, wellness & Life insurance. The O.P.1 & 2 assured the complainant to provide the copy of the loan agreement & payment schedule within a week at the time of sanctioning of loan but till date the O.Ps have not supplied the same. The vehicle used to run in mines work & as per instructed payment schedule the complainant was regularly paying his loan installments to the O.Ps without any fail. Due to repeated breakdown of aforesaid vehicle, closure of mines, financial stringency & illness of the husband of the complainant, he could not repay balance outstanding loan dues & besides this when complainant wants to deposit the amount but the cashier of the O.P.1 & 2 refused to accept the amount and told that it is less than the EMI. Suddenly the O.P.1 & 2 and his official staffs without observing the norms & guidelines issued by the R.B.I. observation & order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court repossessed the vehicle on 05.03.2022 while the vehicle was loaded with goods without giving any due notice in writing & for which the complainant informed the same in written to the I.I.C. Talcher P.S. for illegal, unauthorized repossession of the vehicle & wrongful activities of Tata Motors Finance Ltd. & his official staffs & recovery agent. The complainant informed the O.Ps about the matter & wants to know where in the O.Ps told that since there was default in payment of the loan, the vehicle was repossessed. The O.P.1 assured to release the vehicle in favour of the complainant if he will deposit a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- in loan amount in favour of O.P. The complainant was ready & willing to deposit the amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. On 14.03.2022 the complainant requested to the O.Ps to nominate any person as Arbitrator for final settlement of account & the venue of arbitration proceeding may be at Balasore & Bhadrak Branch Office. But O.P.1 & 2 neither choose to answer nor appointed any Arbitrator & demanding the amount of Rs.27,83,503/-. On 09.11.2022 the O.P.3 issued Form No.37 for surrender the certificate of registration etc. to the complainant which is not only wrong, illegal but also process of law as the vehicle of the complainant has been illegally repossessed by the O.P.1 & 2 through goonda which law does not authorize. The complainant never committed any willful default or negligence in performance of his obligation, in other hand a serious responsibility under law casted against the O.Ps to fulfill the terms & conditions but no effective steps have yet been made which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of O.Ps. The complainant suffers with both mental & physical agony as well as financial loss for the activity of the O.Ps. As such the complainant compelled to file this case & prayed to direct the O.Ps to handover the TATA LPT 4225 BSVI 10X2 vide Regd. No.OD-04-Q-5411 & supplied the statement of account, payment schedule & loan cum hypothecation agreement. The O.Ps be directed not charge the delay payment charges & late payment fees, if any & the O.P.3 be directed not to transfer, cancellation or issue fresh R.C. to any thirty party. The complainant has filed the documents i.e. (1) Registration Certificate, (2) Form 37, dtd.09.11.2022 issued by O.P.3 to complainant & (3) Representation of the complainant to the O.Ps.
The O.P.No.1 & 2 submit that, the complainant availed a commercial vehicle loan from the O.P. Company by entering into an agreement & the complainant had agreed to the terms & conditions of the said agreement. The complainant taken the loan to the tune of Rs.34,98,325/- from the O.P.1 & 2 vide Loan Agreement No.5003432641 dtd.13.08.2020 for purchasing TATA LPT 4225 which was registered before R.T.O. vide No.OD-04-Q-5411 and had agreed upon all the terms & conditions of the said agreement, inter-alia agreeing to repay the loan in 58 installments amounting to Rs.25,110/- per month for the first EMI & second EMI of Rs.25,000/- & the remaining 56 Emi’s amounting to Rs.88,250/- starting from 11.10.2020 to 11.07.2025. After availing financial assistance from the O.P. Company, the complainant did not adhere to the terms of the agreement & neglected to pay regular monthly installments even after repeated requests by the O.Ps for which the O.P. Company had given a loan recall notice to the complainant on 09.09.2022 calling upon the complainant to pay Rs.33,85,970.35 Paisa due as on 09.02.2022. The subject vehicle was surrendered by the complainant on dtd.05.03.2022 on basis of the understanding that upon the sale of the vehicle, no further claim would be made by the O.Ps. After surrender of the vehicle, the O.P. Company give another chance to the complainant to pay the dues & to get the vehicle released for which, the O.P. Company issued a pre-sale notice to the complainant on 28.03.2022. Even after receiving the pre-sale notice, the complainant slept over the matter & did not come forward to pay the dues for which, the O.P. Company sold the vehicle on 10.06.2022 towards a full & final settlement of the contractual dues. Exercising legitimate right to recover the dues by a financer cannot be treated as deficiency of service or unfair trade practice. The prayer of the complainant to release the vehicle in his favour is not sustainable as the vehicle has already been sold to thirty party on the basis of the Pre-Sale notice dtd.28.03.2022 and the O.Ps have committed no deficiency of service. The O.Ps have filed the documents i.e. (1) Loan recall notice to the complainant dtd.09.02.2022 & (2) Pre-sale notice to the complainant dtd.28.03.2022.
The O.P.No.3 submits that, the petitioner Rukshar Khatoon has purchased the vehicle bearing Regd. No.OD-04-Q-5411 through the financer named as Tata Motors Finance Ltd. The O.P.No.3 is the registering authority. The O.P.3 is to register the vehicle as per the guideline of the Govt. on receiving the required fees. Accordingly on 18.11.2022 the ownership of the vehicle has been transferred to the financer after due process & receiving of requisite fees. This case has been filed on 25.11.2022 & O.P.3 has received the notice on 03.12.2022. Much before receiving the notice the ownership of the vehicle has been transferred. So question raised in the petition not to surrender RC & other documents is beyond of our preview. As the documents along with the RC Book has already been issued to the financer. The O.P.3 has no roll over the financed vehicle as such direction against O.P.3 to transfer, cancellation & issue fresh RC to any party at the belated stage may not be ordered & excused. The O.P.No.3 has filed the documents as (1) Copy of Form-24 (Motor vehicle register) & (2) Letter of authorization for appearance dtd.13.12.2022.
Having heard the rival contentions and materials available in the case record, this commission is of the opinion that the complainant has failed to establish any overt act which may be termed as deficiency in service. The complainant has even failed to mention as to what amount of loan she has repaid till the date the vehicle was repossess. She even did not file any document in support of repayment of her loan. Under such circumstances, this commission has ample reasons to believe that there was unpaid due. Exercising legitimate right to recover the dues by a financer cannot be treated as deficiency of service or unfair trade practice. The prayer of the complainant to release the vehicle in her favour is not sustainable as the vehicle has already been sold to thirty party on the basis of the Pre-Sale notice dtd.28.03.2022 and the O.Ps have committed no deficiency of service. As per the averments of R.T.O. i.e. O.P. No.3 on 18.11.2022 the ownership of the vehicle has been transferred to the financer after due process.
O R D E R.
In the result, the complaint be & same is dismissed. No order of cost against any party.
This order is pronounced in the Open Court on this the 16th day of July 2024 under my hand and seal of the Commission.
