Date of filing of the case-09.11.2016.

                                                                                 Date of order                   - 25.07.2017

JUDGMENT.

Sri A.K.Purohit, President.

                     The  case of the complainant is that he had purchased a Mahindra Scorpio vehicle with financial assistance of the O.Ps. The complainant was sanctioned with a loan amount of Rs 4,00,000/-  and accordingly a loan agreement was executed between the parties vide agreement No.HO/G/00220/01/000183 dt.16.11.2002. According to the said loan agreement the complainant has to cleared all the installments by 25.9.2003 .The complainant alleges that, although he had repaid Rs 4,30,396/- towards loan amount to the O.Ps and only  Rs 5,000/- was outstanding till 25.09.2003. Although the complainant wants to repay  the same,   the O.Ps denied to receive the same  and to  issue the NOC. The complainant further alleges that although he had paid Rs 500/- for a statement of account, the same was also denied. Hence the complainant has preferred this case alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.

2.                 The O.Ps have entered appearance on dt.14.02.2017 but they have not filed their  version within the prescribed and hence they are set experte vide order dt.29.06.2017. On dt.12.07.2017 when the case was fixed for  experte hearing, the O.Ps have filed their version. However, the same has been perused for proper adjudication of the case. According to the O.Ps the case is barred by limitation and the complainant instead of approaching the O.P for NOC has approached this forum after a long period of 14 years. Since the complainant has not cleared the loan amount, the O.Ps have right to hold the NOC. Hence the O.Ps claim no deficiency in service on their part.

3.                 Heard the complainant. Perused  the written version and material available on record. In their written version the O.Ps have raised a preliminary objection relating to limitation. Therefore before going into the merits of the case, it is necessary to discuss on the point of preliminary objection. It is an admitted fact that the O.Ps have sanctioned a loan amount of Rs 4,00,000/- in favour of the complainant which has to be repaid by 25 September 2003, in equal installments. The complainant has admitted that, there was an outstanding of Rs 5,000/- and NOC has not yet been issued by the O.Ps. The O.Ps have also not disputed the same. Therefore since the NOC; has not yet; been issued the cause of action is continuing till closure of the loan amount. Hence the case  is not barred by limitation.

4.                Coming to the merits of the case, it is seen from the complaint petition which is supported by an affidavit that, by the end of September 2003 ,there was an outstanding of Rs 5,000/- towards the loan amount of the complainant and the complainant has  approached several time for repayment but the O.Ps have denied the same. The O.Ps have not produced any rebuttal evidence nor have produced the account statement. Therefore there is no evidence available on record to show that, under a valid reason the O.Ps have denied to receive the same. When the complainant wants  to repay all the loan amounts there is no reason for the O.P to deny to close the loan account of the complainant and to issue the NOC. In para-4 of the complaint petition the complainant has pleaded that, the out-standing amount including the late fine is Rs 5,000/- In reply to the same the O.Ps have stated in para-9 (B) that, the complainant has not paid the delayed payment charged but they have not produced amount showing the delayed charges. Therefore, it is; believed that, the outstanding amount against the complainant is Rs 5,000/- including delayed charges.

5.                  When the complainant wants to clear the loan account and refused by the O.Ps amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. Due to this negligence act of the O.Ps the complainant has sufficiently harassed and is entitled to compensation. Hence ordered;

                                      ORDER.

                   The O.Ps are directed to issue NOC  in favour of the complainant towards his loan account after receiving Rs 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) from the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order.

                   Further the O.Ps are directed to pay Rs 4,000/- (Rupees four thousand) towards compensation and Rs 1,000-/ (Rupees one thousand) towards cost to the complainant within the above said period, failing which the amount of compensation and cost will carry and interest @ 8% P.A till payment.

                  Accordingly the case is disposed off.

(S.Rath)                                            (G.K.Rath)                                                (A.K.Purohit)

Member.                                           Member.                                                  President.