Kerala

Palakkad

CC/292/2019

Zeenath - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager - Opp.Party(s)

P.C. Sivadas

27 Jun 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
Near District Panchayath Office, Palakkad - 678 001, Kerala
 
Complaint Case No. CC/292/2019
( Date of Filing : 23 Dec 2019 )
 
1. Zeenath
W/o. Abbass Nabeesa Manzil, 9/8, Vettikad, Mathur P.O, Palakkad.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Branch Manager
Mahindra and Mahindra Financial, Services Ltd., 2nd Floor, T.M. Complex, Chandranagar, Palakkad - 678 007
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Vinay Menon.V PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Vidya A MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Krishnankutty. N.K MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 27 Jun 2022
Final Order / Judgement

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PALAKKAD

Dated this the 27th   day of  June, 2022

Present  :  Sri.Vinay Menon V., President        

             :   Smt.Vidya.A., Member

             :   Sri. Krishnankutty.N.K.,Member             

    Date of filing: 24/12/2019

                                              CC/292/2019

           

 

Zeenath,                         

W/o Abbas,

Nabeesa Manzil,9/8, Vettikkad,                                        -                  Complainant 

Mathur, P O,Palakkad.

(By Adv. P. C. Sivadas)

 

V/s

The Branch Manager,

Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Ltd,

2nd Floor,  TM Complex                                                                       -              Opposite party

Chandranagar,Palakkad 678007.                                       

(By Adv. Viju K Raphael )

                                                            O R D E R

 

By Sri. Krishnankutty.N.K.,Member            

 

1.Pleadings of the complaint.

 

            The complainant availed financial assistance of Rs. 2,89,000/-from the opposite party for the purchase of Jeeto X 7-16 vehicle on 16.05.2017.She made regular payments of monthly instalments upto 15/07/2018.There was some delay in payments thereafter. Subsequently she made payments through net banking for which there are no receipts. According to her, there are overdues to a tune of six or seven instalments.

The allegation of the complainant is that the opposite party is threatening her either to close the loan or to return the vehicle, failing which they will forcefully take possession of the vehicle.

She is apprehensive that the the forms she had signed including the blank forms might  be utilized by the opposite party to  take possession of the vehicle and  transfer it in their name  without giving any receipt, thereby leaving her liable for the entire balance loan amount.

Another allegation is that, when she directly approached the opposite party on 21/12/2019 and demanded for the receipts for the payments made through net banking, her request was denied and the opposite party demanded repayment of the full loan amount. They also threatened that they will take possession of the vehicle if amounts are not paid.

2.         The opposite party entered appearance and filed their version on 24/02/2020.While denying the allegations made by the complainant, they narrated their stand as follows.

A.         The complainant had availed a loan of Rs. 2,89,000/-for the purchase of vehicle as stated in the complaint duly executing a loan cum hypothecation agreement on 16/05/2017

B.         It was agreed that the loan was to be repaid in 48 equated monthly instalments of Rs 8,370.00. Thereby, the total amount to be repaid is Rs 4,01,760.00.

C.         The complainant has paid 28 EMI s including the EMI s paid online. Thus the total amount paid is Rs. 2,34,420.00 and the amount due as on 01/02/2020 was Rs. 74,791.00, excluding the future installments. The last EMI is due on 15/04/2021.

D.         The repossession and recall of the loan etc are as per the terms of the agreement entered in to between the complainant and the opposite party at the time of availing the loan.

E.         Hence the actions taken by the  opposite party  is in accordance with the law of the land and the agreement entered into between the parties.

They also contended that the Commission lacks jurisdiction to entertain this complaint since both parties have agreed to confer exclusive jurisdiction to Mumbai Courts in respect of any matter, claims or disputes arising out of the loan agreement and also due to the arbitration clause in the same.

3.         The complainant has not put forth any counter arguments to the points in the version of the opposite party. She neither submitted proof affidavit nor had taken any interest to prove the allegations made by her  in the complaints. Complainant was continuously absent for the sittings after 03/08/2021.

Hence the complaint was taken for orders based on merits.

4.         The complainant's allegations  are about the deficiency in service in relation to the financial assistance availed from the opposite party. But she has failed to prove the same by adducing sufficient evidence to support her allegations. She did not even file proof affidavit with supporting documents in-spite of repeated opportunities given by this Commission from 17/03/2020 onwards.

 

In view of all what is stated above, the complaint is DISMISSED.

 

           Pronounced in the open court on this the 27th  day of  June, 2022.

                                                                                                                       Sd/-

                                                                                                                         Vinay Menon V

                                                     President

                                                          Sd/-                                   

                                                                                                                 Vidya.A

                                                     Member

                                                        Sd/-

                                                                                                     Krishnankutty.N.K

                                                                                                              Member

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Vinay Menon.V]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Vidya A]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Krishnankutty. N.K]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.