DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II U.T. CHANDIGARH Complaint Case No.: 143 of 2010 Date of Inst: 09.03.2010 Date of Decision:06.08.2010 Amarpreet Singh Luna s/o M.S.Luna r/o 521, Phase-1, Mohali. ---Complainant V E R S U S Tata Motors Ltd., Zonal Office Sector 22 (Near Tehal Singh Dhaba), Chandigarh. ---Opposite Party QUORUM SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT SHRI ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI MEMBER SMT.MADHU MUTNEJA MEMBER PRESENT: None for the complainant OP exparte. --- PER LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT Sh.Amarpreet Singh Luna has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying therein that a compensation of Rs.5 lacs be awarded to him besides costs of litigation. 2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that he purchased Tata Indica Car from Tata Motors through their agency M/s Goyal Motors Pvt. Ltd. Patiala for Rs.3,54,000/. The car was financed by Tata Motors to the extent of Rs.2 lakhs. The said loan was to be repaid in 60 installments of Rs.4200/- each. The complainant issued postdated cheques in discharge of his liability which were duly encashed by OP except one cheque which bounced on 06.03.2007. According to the complainant, he made the payment in cash against the bounced cheque vide receipt dated 08.03.2007. Similarly, the complainant deposited Rs.4200/- in cash against another bounced cheque vide receipt No.308047598. It has been pleaded that he received a notice dated 15.10.2008 from Kohli and Sobti, Advocates, New Delhi directing him to pay Rs.8468 along with accrued expenses on account of dishonour of the cheque on 06.03.2007. The complainant was also threatened of institution of criminal proceedings under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1981. Ultimately, the complainant filed a complaint baring No.1366 of 2008 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, UT, Chandigarh which was allowed by the Learned District Forum-I, UT, Chandigarh vide order dated 06.04.2009 directing the OP to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for harassment besides Rs.1100/- as costs of litigation within 30 days from the receipt of the copy of the order. According to the complainant, despite the above said order passed by the Learned District Forum-I, OP has raised a fresh demand by various letters. The last letter is dated 20.02.2010 whereby a demand of Rs.7949.68P has been raised. The case of the complainant is that he has paid the entire loan amount and nothing is outstanding against him. It was so held by the Learned District Forum-1 vide its order dated 06.04.2009. So the above said demands amount to deficiency in service on the part of part of OP. So the complainant is entitled to the reliefs mentioned above. 3. OP was duly served. But nobody appeared either in person or through counsel on its behalf. Therefore, OP was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 02.07.2010. 4. As none was present on behalf of the complainant on 02.08.2010, therefore we proceed to dispose of the complaint on merits under Rule 4(8) of the Chandigarh Consumer Protection Rules, 19878 read with Section 13(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 even in the absence of the complainant. 5. We have perused the record and have gone through the documents very carefully. 6. The complainant has placed on record the copy of the order dated 06.04.2009 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, UT, Chandigarh. In the said order, it has been held by the Learned District Forum-1 that nothing is outstanding against the complainant so the demands raised by OP amounts to deficiency in service. In these circumstances, OP was ordered to pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- along with costs of litigation amounting to Rs.1100/-. Despite the above said order, OP has again started raising demands on the complainant regarding the said amount. The first demand is dated 07.06.2009 for a sum of Rs.350/- as retainer charges. Then there is another letter dated 20.06.2009 demanding a sum of Rs.5199.68P being outstanding amount of two installments. Another demand is dated 28.08.2009 regarding a sum of Rs.5899.68P. In the above said letter, a threat has also been given that in case the above said amount is not paid, the proceedings under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,1981 would be initiated. Then there is another letter dated 25.10.2009 demanding a sum of Rs.350/- as retainer charges. Then there is a notice dated 31.10.2009 issued by Mohit Gardkari and Company requiring the complainant to pay a sum of Rs.6249.68P. Another notice is dated 25.11.2009 demanding a sum of Rs.6599.68P. then there is another letter dated 20.02.2010 demanding a sum of Rs.7949.68P. 6. The complainant has stated on oath that he has paid the entire amount and nothing is outstanding against him towards the said loan. The amount of cheques which had been bounced were paid to OP in cash against regular receipts. The above said deposition finds corroboration from the order dated 06.04.2009 passed by the Learned District Forum-I. 7. From the documentary evidence on record, it is duly proved that no amount is outstanding against the complainant towards the said loan and despite it OP is harassing the complainant to no end by making repeated demands despite the fact that OP has already been held deficient in service on this score by the Learned District Forum-I vide its order dated 06.04.2009 and a compensation was ordered to be paid to the complainant. It appears that the compensation awarded vide order dated 06.04.2009 passed by the Learned District Forum-I is not sufficient deterrent for OP. 8. Keeping in view the fact that the complainant is being harassed continuously despite the specific orders of the competent authority, OP is directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant for continuous harassment despite the order passed by the Learned District Forum-1 dated 06.04.2009. In addition to this, OP is also directed to pay Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses. 9. This order be complied with by the OP within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the OP shall be liable to pay Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant along with penal interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 09.03.2010 till its realization besides costs of litigation. 10. Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. Announced sd/- 06.08.2010 (LAKSHMAN SHARMA) PRESIDENT Cm sd/- (ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI) MEMBER Sd/- (MADHU MUTNEJA) MEMBER
| | MR. A.R BHANDARI, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT | MRS. MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER | | 
