Judgment & Order dt. 11.09.2017
With the allegation of fraud and deception practised on the part of OP-company, the complainant has come up before this Forum with the filing of the instant complaint made u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986, praying for refund of ₹27,000/- and other remedies as mentioned in the prayer portion of the complaint.
The nub of the complaint / petition may be described as follows.
The complainant is a teacher of Banshihari High School, Dakshin Dinajpur. In the month of February, 2013 she purchased one ALTO 800 LXI BS-IV from a dealer of Burdwan, namely ‘Beekay Auto Pvt. Ltd.’, having taken a loan amount of ₹2.58 lakh from the OP-Company with hypothecation of the vehicle. The EMI was fixed at ₹6,120/- and the complainant paid EMI upto July, 2016. So far the OP-Company did not supply any statement of account to the complainant. It was in the month of August, 2016, she got a statement of account of her loan account No.246581 and after having received such account, she came to know that the loan amount was granted to her for Maruti Alto K-10 and not for Alto 800, which she has purchased. The cost price of the vehicle is mentioned on the loan account as being ₹3,17,710/-(asset cost), instead of ₹2,90,719.96, which is the market price of Alto 800 vehicle. In all demand notices also the OP-Company has described the vehicle as being Alto K-10. According to the complainant, the OP-Company has thus swindled a fabulous sum of money from her, having made her liable to pay EMI on the price of Alto K-10, instead of Alto 800. She has raised her grievance again and again before the OP-Company, but to no effect. Lastly, the OP-Company by its letter dt. 14.4.2017 has terminated the loan agreement and demanded payment of ₹1,38,300/- from the complainant as being due on 14.4.2017. Now the complainant has filed the instant case praying for issuing a direction to OP-Company to refund ₹27,000/- being excessive amount received by it through illegal means, pay arrear installments from August, 2016 till date without charging any penal interest and to further pay ₹1,00,000/- as compensation for mental pain and agony and physical harassment of the complainant. Hence, arises the instant case.
Notice was served upon the OP; but the OP did not turn up to contest the case and therefore the case was heard ex parte against it. Thereafter, on 6.9.2017, one Lawyer appeared and filed the written statement along with some documents. The written statement and the documents are kept in the record for consideration at the time of writing judgment.
The case of the OP-Company is that no fraud has been practised upon the complainant as alleged. According to it, the company has advanced a loan of ₹2.58 lakh to the complainant for purchasing Maruti Alto K-10 vehicle as is described in the quotation supplied to them by the dealer of the vehicle. The loan agreement was also correctly prepared and the complainant agreed to repay the loan amount within 5 years by 58 installments of which the first installment was ₹6,627/- and all the other installments were ₹6,120/- each. The financial charge i.e. interest was ₹1,03,587/-. The complainant has made default in payment of installments in terms of agreement and therefore, the loan agreement has been terminated. There has been no deficiency in service on the part of OP-Company as alleged by the complainant and as such the case should be dismissed.
The complainant has filed an affidavit-in-chief and has also got herself examined as PW-1. The documents admitted in evidence on behalf of the complainant are marked Ext Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6-series, 7, 8 and 9 as detailed in the list of documents kept in record.
Points for determination:
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of OP-Company as alleged by the complainant?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
Already heard the submission of the learned Lawyer appearing for the complainant. Perused the complaint and also written statement. Also perused the documents filed on behalf of the parties. Considered all these.
The main grievance of the complainant is that she has been deceived by the OP company.
According to her, she has purchased Alto 800 vehicle and not Alto K-10 vehicle. Alto 800 vehicle has been delivered to her by the dealer of the car company. The price of Alto 800 is ₹2,90,710.96, whereas that of Alto K-10 is ₹3,17,710/-. The OP company has been recovering by installments from her ₹3,17,710/- and thus, she has been deceived by the OP-company. In her estimate, the OP-company is liable to make payment of excess amount received from her i.e. ₹27,710/- (₹3,17,710 – ₹2,90,710.96).
In the context of the above submission as advanced on behalf of the complainant, it is to be seen whether the complainant has actually been deceived by the OP company or
by any one else. It stands established that the complainant purchased one Alto 800 car from the dealer namely ‘Beekay Auto Pvt. Ltd. It is proved by Form No.21 (Sale Certificate) dt. 25.2.2013 issued by the said dealer. The price of this vehicle is ₹2,90,710.96. The copy of registration certificate has also been filed on behalf of the complainant and it is seen fromthere that the Alto 800 stands registered in the name of the complainant. The registration number is WB-62C 3923 and the date of registration is 19.3.2013. From these documents it is clear that the complainant purchased a Maruti Alto 800 vehicle from the car dealer. The OP has filed some documents including the quotation which was produced before the OP-Company by the complainant. This quotation issued by the car dealer is dt. 19.2.2013 and it relates to Alto K-10 vehicle whose price is ₹3,17,710/-. This quotation was produced before the OP company by the complainant and on the basis of this quotation the OP advanced a loan of ₹2,58,000/- to the complainant. There is a schedule i.e. schedule-1 attached to the loan agreement executed by and between the complainant and the authorized person of OP company. A perusal of schedule-1 reveals that the loan amount advanced to the complainant was ₹2,58,000/- and the down payment amount was ₹59,710/-. This schedule-1 is also signed by the complainant. From a perusal of schedule-1 it is revealed that the complainant made a total payment of ₹3,17,710/- of which ₹2,58,000/- was taken as loan from the OP company and ₹59,710/- was paid by her from her pocket as down payment. ₹3,17,710/- is the price of Maruti Alto K-10 vehicle and the quotation which was produced before the OP company was also relating to Maruti Alto K-10 vehicle. But, the fact remains that Maruti Alto 800 vehicle has been delivered to the complainant
and it is found that the complainant has been deceived at this juncture. By whom is she deceived? She is not deceived by the OP company. The OP company advanced a loan amount of ₹2,58,000/- over which the complainant is required to pay ₹1,03,587/- as interest i.e. financial charges. It has been submitted on behalf of the complainant that the OP company has mistakenly noted Maruti Alto K-10 LXI as against ‘Asset details’ in their statement of account and that they have thus committed a deficiency in service. In our opinion, no mistake has been committed by the OP company in the statement of account, because it is the complainant who produced the quotation of Maruti Alto K-10 before the OP company. So, how can the OP company be held liable for any deficiency in service as alleged? We are last persons to hold the OP company liable for committing any deficiency in service as alleged or for practising any kind of deception on the complainant in so far as the delivery of the vehicle is concerned. If the complainant is deceived, she is deceived by any other person than the OP company and this being so, the instant case which is filed by the complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of OP company appears to have no leg at all.
In the result, the case deserves to be dismissed and it is dismissed accordingly.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
that the complaint case be and the same is dismissed ex parte against the OP company without any cost.
Let a plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost at once to the parties concerned.
