The case record is posted today for further hearing. Neither the complainant nor his Advocate is present and no step is taken on his behalf. OP No.1 & 2 appeared and filed written version whereas OP No.3 was set ex parte. Learned counsel for the contesting O.Ps are also absent. On repeated calls, none respond on behalf of both the parties. As it appears from the case record, both the parties are absent since long. Due to the long absence of the parties, the hearing of this case impaired. Thus, taking into consideration the long absence of both the parties, this Commission is constrained to dispose of the case on merit.
2 On perusal of the complaint petition, it is seen that the complainant had purchased one truck bearing Registration No. OR-09E-0273, being financed by the contesting O.Ps for earning his livelihood. There was agreement between the complainant and the O.Ps for repayment of the loan amount in 34 instalments @ Rs.19,000/- per instalment. In the meantime, the complainant had repaid the entire loan amount. On demand, the O.Ps did not issue NOC in favour of the complainant.
3. Contesting O.Ps have stated, inter alia, that the vehicle in question was purchased by the complainant taking loan from the O.Ps and as per the agreement, he did not repay the outstanding loan amount intentionally. Thus, the complainant is not entitled to the NOC as claimed by him.
4. Carefully perused the pleadings so also the documents filed by both the parties. From the document i.e. PARTICLLARS OF VEHICLE AND LOAN filed on behalf of the O.Ps, it is found as follows –
- The retail price of the alleged truck was Rs.7,27,045/-
- Down payment paid Rs.1,97,043/-
- Loan amount Rs.5,30,000/-
- Premium for insurance Rs. 36,000/-
- Interest amount Rs. 99,375/-
In total - Rs.6,65,375/-
1st Month 1 Rs.19,375/-
Next 34 Months Rs.19,000/-
5. It is stated by the O.Ps in their written version that the aforesaid loan with interest and insurance provision aggregating to Rs.6,65,375/- was repayable by way of 35 equated monthly instalments @ Rs.19,000/- p.m. except the first instalment of Rs.19,375/-. But on perusal of the document i.e. . PARTICLLARS OF VEHICLE AND LOAN, it is found that the O.Ps had already received payment of Rs.19,375/- in the first month and the complainant was to pay in next 34 months @ Rs.19,000/- per month. Thus, it is held that the O.Ps have contradicted their own version. However, taking into consideration the documentary evidence, the complainant was liable to pay the loan amount with interest in 34 monthly instalments except instalment of Rs.19,375/-. On perusal of the statement of account mentioned in the aforesaid document, it is found that the complainant had already paid 35 instalments viz. 34 instalments @ Rs.19,000/- and one instalment @ Rs.19,375/- and thus, according to the WORK SHEET prepared by the O.Ps, the complainant had already paid Rs.6,65,375/-. It is also seen from the above statement that the complainant had paid the 34 monthly instalments consecutively one after another including first instalment @ Rs.19,375/- starting from 1.7.2004 to 1.5.2007 and there was no delay. From the above, it is held that the claim of the contesting O.Ps are all baseless and with a view to harass the complainant and to put him into mental agony and financial loss, the O.Ps have not issued NOC intentionally and deliberately and therefore, deficiency in service clearly attributes against the O.Ps. Thus, the O.Ps are jointly and severally liable for the compensation, as prayed for by the complainant.
6. Hence, the O.Ps are directed to issue “No Objection Certificate” in favour of the complainant forthwith along with compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards harassment, mental agony & financial loss, within 45 days of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to realize the same through the process of law.
Accordingly, the case of the complainant is disposed of.
