DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

BHUBANESWAR:

C.D. NO. 121/ 2017

Dipti Prasad Das, aged about 44  years,

 S/o-  Late  Nitai Prasad Das,  At- Plot No.58, Basant Vihar,

Near  Brahameswar Temple, Bhubaneswar - 751018

….       Complainant

-Vrs.-

Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, 

Retail Assets Central Processing Centre,  (RACPC), 4^th Floor,

Administrative Unit, Near Capital Police Station,

Bhubaneswar- 751009.

                                                                                                ….       Opp. Party      

For the complainant                Mr. Sambit Das, K.C.Prusty & Associates (Advocate)

For the O.P.                            Mr. S.K..Mishra  & Associates (Adv.)

DATE OF FILING                :           22/04/2017

DATE OF ORDER                :           29/11/2023

ORDER

K.C.RATH, PRESIDENT

1.         This is an application U/s 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986.

2.         The complainant’s case in brief is that,  he  incurred a loan  of Rs.14,43,000/-from the OP  in order to purchase a car. The complainant had to repay the loan amount along with interest in 84 monthly installments @ Rs.24,518/- per month. As claimed by the complainant,  he  was repaying the installments  regularly.  But,  as his account was seized by Income Tax department, he defaulted in paying certain installments. He received a notice from the OP on 18/04/2017 to clear the outstanding installments of Rs.78,050/-. Immediately thereafter,  on 20/04/2017, he received another notice from the OP  to the effect that the OP Bank has decided to repossess the vehicle in respect of which, loan was sanctioned. The conduct of the OP was whimsical. In apprehending seizure of the vehicle in question, the complainant filed this complaint.

3.         On the other hand, the OP  filed written version  contending therein that,  the complaint  is not maintainable. The complainant has no locustandi to file this complaint.  There is no cause of action against the OP.  As per the terms & conditions of the agreement, the complainant had to repay the installments regularly. When the complainant defaulted in paying the monthly installments, the OP,  as per the terms & conditions of the agreement, has decided to repossess the vehicle hypothecated to it. Since the action of the OP is in accordance with law, the complainant has no cause of action to file this complaint. Hence it is liable to be dismissed.

4          Perused the materials on record.  Admittedly, the complainant incurred  loan  from the OP in order to purchase a car.  In his complaint petition the complainant has admitted that, he defaulted in paying three numbers of monthly installments. As per the terms & conditions of the agreement,  if the loanee commits default in repaying the loan amount, then the right accrues to the financier to repossess the vehicle in respect of which, loan was sanctioned.  There is no deficiency in service nor is there any unfair trade practice on the part of the OP.  Therefore, this Commission finds that,  the complaint bears no merit. Hence it is ordered.

ORDER

The complaint is  hereby  dismissed on contest  against the OP  being devoid of merit.

The order is pronounced on this day the  29^th   November,  2023  under the seal & signature of the President and Member (W) of the Commission.

                                                                                                (K.C.RATH)

                                                                                                 PRESIDENT

 Dictated & corrected by me

               President                                                                                    

I agree                                                                                                

(S.Tripathy)                                                                                        

Member (W)                                                                             

Transcribed by Smt. M.Kanungo, Sr.Steno