Orissa

Jajapur

CC/1/2017

Sri Narendra Sahoo - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager,Hinduja Ley Land finance Co.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Pratap Kumar Ray,R.Mohanty,Satya Sundar Das

24 Nov 2017

ORDER

IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.

                                                        Present:      1.Shri Jiban ballav Das , President

                                                                            2.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,

                                                                            3.Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.                      

                                       Dated the 24th day of November,2017.

                                                      C.C.Case No.01 of 2017

Sri Narenndra Sahoo  S/O Sri Gobinda ch.Sahoo

Vill.  Lenka Balisahi P.O. Mangarajpur

Via. Kabirpur , Dist.-Jajpur.                                                                            …… ……....Complainant .                                                                       .

                   (Versus)

The Branch Manager,Hinduja Ley land, Finance Co. Ltd, Jajpur Road,

( New Royal Kalinga Hotel ,Nahaka Chhak,P.O/P.S/ Jajpur Road ,Dt.Jajpur.

                                                                                                                               ………..O.Ps.

 

For the Complainant:                           Sri P.K.Ray, R.Mohanty, S.S.Das,Advocates.

For the Opp.Parties :                            Sri S.Ch. Pradhan,  R.P. Pradhan, S.K.Pradhan,

                                                             Sri C.R. Ojha, P.K. Das, Advocates.

                                                                                                     Date of order:   24.11.2017.

SHRI   PITABAS  MOHANTY,  MEMBER  .

Deficiency in financial service is the grievance of the petitioner.

            The facts  as per complaint petition as stated by the petitioner are that he purchased a two wheeler vehicle bearing Regd. No..OD-04-D-7629 taking  financial assistance  from the O.P by virtue of an agreement .  It is alleged by the petitioner that though he has already cleared up  the loan dues along with interest but the O.P  did not issue NOC against the above vehicle and playing hide and seek game with him to issue NOC . Accordingly  the petitioner served a Legal notice  by R.P on 21.09.16 requesting him to give the same but they did not yield any result. As such  the attitude of the O.P towards to the petitioner amounts to illegal trade practice and deficiency of service for which the O.P is liable to  pay compensation  for mental agony and harassment. Accordingly the petitioner filed the present dispute with the prayer to direct the O.P to issue NOC along with to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- for deficiency of service.

            After appearance the O.P  filed the written version  taking following stands.

That the O.p is no way of  fault for the allegation made by the complainant in this case. The O.p communicated to the head office at chenai about the closure of loan account of the complainant and NOC to be issued in favour of him. As per the guide lines of O.P  being  the area office communicate to the head office about closure of loan account and thereafter the head office send NOC to the customers directly to his residential address through regd. Post. The complainant has cleared his arrear due in the month of August’2016 and immediately after closing of the same the Branch Manager took appropriate steps and wrote to head office for issuance of NOC to the complainant. In the mean time the head office must have send NOC to the customer / complainant and it may be some communication gap for which the complainant could not able to receive the same. The O.P  to prove their bonafideness again admits and issue  a NOC from the area office ,even there is provision for issuance of NOC is to be from head office. If the complainant has not receive the NOC from head office, then the O.p undertakes again to take appropriate steps for issuance of NOC from head office.

            On the date of hearing we heard the argument from the learned advocate  for both the sides.  After perusal of the record and documents  filed from both the sides we observed that:

1.It is undisputed fact that the petitioner purchased the above vehicle taking  financial assistance from  the O.P.

2.It is also undisputed fact that the petitioner already cleared up all the loan dues along with interest of the O.P  as per hypothecation Agreement .

3.It is also admitted   fact that since  the O.P  did not issue the NOC  of the above vehicle the petitioner served a legal notice by R.P  to the O.P  on dt.21.9.16 with the grievance to issue the same . On the other hand the O.P  has taken the plea in the written version  that the head office of the O.P  till date has not issued  the NOC though  the petitioner  has cleared up  the loan amount along with interest before one year prior to filing of the present dispute. Accordingly  it is our considered view that the O.P  committed  patent deficiency of service as well as unfair trade practice for non issuance of NOC after receipt  of loan dues as per observation of National Commission  reported  in 2011 (1)CPR-223- (N.C) Magma financé   Co. Ltd. Vrs. Arshad Husein

“Finance company can not refuse  to issue NOC even after clearing of  the loan amount .”

  Further  non reply of legal notice may draw adverse inference as per observation of National commission  reported in 2013(1) CPR-456-N.C (M/S Ritya  Vrs. Siknader Singh )

             From the above analysis  it clearly  goes  to establish that the O.P  has committed  patient deficiency of service  for which the petitioner was debarred  to avail NOC  of the above vehicle . As such to meet the ends of justice we allow the dispute.

O R D E R

In the result the dispute is allowed against the O.P . The O.P is  directed to issue NOC  to the petitioner within 7 days after receipt of this order  . Further the O.P  is also directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand)  within one month after receipt of this order . No cost.    

                        This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 24th day of  November,2017. under my hand and seal of the Forum.