Date of filing:- 02/02/2015

Date of Order:- 04/05/2016

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FOURM (COURT)

B A R G A R H.

Consumer Complaint No. 05 of 2015.

Sri Tumraj Padhan, S/o. Hemasagara Pradhan, aged about 58(Fifty eight) years, Occupation- Business, R/o. Patrapali, P.o.- Barihapali, P.s./Tahasil- Padampur, Dist.- Bargarh. ..... ..... ..... Complainant.

-V e r s u s -

The Manager, TaTa Motors Finance Ltd., At.- Building A, 2nd Floor, Lodha-I, Think Techno Campus Off - Pokharan Road, 2- Thane (West) 400607.

.... ..... ..... ..... Opposite Party.

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant :- Sri. M.K. Satpathy, Advocate with others Advocates.

For the Opposite Party :- Sri B.K. Panda, Advocate with others Advocates.

-: P R E S E N T :-

Mrs Anjali Behera .... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r(w).

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r.

Dt.04/05/2016. -: J U D G E M E N T:-

Presented by Smt. A. Behera, Member(w).

Brief facts :-

The Case of the Complainant is that, he purchased one Tata Magic vehicle through finance by the Opposite Party bearing No. OR-17F-6714 for earning of livelihood and as per the terms of agreement he has to repay the financed amount Rs.4,09,140/-(Rupees four lakh nine thousand one hundred forty)only in 47(forty seven) EMIs of Rs. 8,700/-(Rupees eight thousand seven hundred)only each. Accordingly, Complainant has already paid all the installments and other charges applicable. But on Dt.09/10/2013 got a notice of outstanding of Rs.33,896/-(Rupees thirty three thousand eight hundred ninety six)only and contacted the local office of the Opposite Party for redressal of his issue but in vain. In the process suffered from mental tension and fear of disowning of his vehicle earing his bread and butter and suffered from no income for long time chasing from pillars to post for redressal of the matter Complainant estimates all his losses to Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand)only additionally Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand)only as litigation cost and claims to be suitably compensated and a direction to the Opposite Party to issue no dues certificate for the loan having no outstanding on him.

Complainant files the following documents and relies on them to establish then cause:-

1. Letter of Opposite Party dated 09/10/2013 from Opposite Parties advocate.

2. Receipts of some Installments.

    

On being admitted for adjudication notice served upon the Opposite Party along with the copy of this complaint to appear and file their say about the allegation.

Opposite Party appeared on Dt.24/09/2015 and files version denying all the charges levelled against them and prays for dismissals of the complaint.

Opposite Party files the following documents in support of their case and relies on them to further substantiate then case :-

1. Annexure 1- Contract Details- Describing the types of charges applicable regarding the finance. (4 pages)

2. Index -II- Repayment Details. (5 pages)

3. Receipt Information. (5 pages)

4. Repayment Schedule. (2 pages)

5. Annexure 2- Copy of loan agreement. (10 pages)

    

Hearing was conducted on Dt.23/02/2016, Dt.08/03/2016 and Dt. 16/03/2016 wherein parties substantiated their case in detail referring to the documents. Upon completion of the hearing they were suggested to file then written arguments if wish.

No written arguments filed ratter Complainant files a bunch of documents to which are related to the issue as following -

1. Receipts of Installments paid total 47 pages.

2. Letter dated 26/02/2009 speaking about payment of EMI.

3. Repayment schedule (2 pages) along with a PDC List for the loan account showing a number of cheques not Banked.(1 page)

    

Through the above documents were filed belated they through light to the issue in a considerable manner so accepted for reference purposes.

After hearing, perusal of the documents filed along with the petitions the following points are found important to decide the issue.

1. Opposite Party in their preliminary objections section of the version filed submits that Complainant is a chronic defaulted and according to the terms of agreement Complainant has to pay the overdue charges and associated charges if delay or default in payment of EMI occurs and they are collecting only those amount so no deficiency of service is there. But Opposite Party own documents showing the payment received shows that Complainant paid the installments in time. So objection do not sustain.

2. Other contention of the Opposite Party is that Complainant is not a consumer as per Consumer Protection Act-1986 but on careful consideration Complainant very well a consumer of the Opposite Party Section 2 (1)d as well as per section 2(1) O of the Consumer Protection Act -1986objections again do not sustain.

3. Further Opposite Party objected on the ground of arbitration clause of the agreement which bars any other trial. Here Section-3 of the Consumer Protection Act-1986 reserves the vulnerable suffering issues and this section allows the Consumer Protection Act-1986 to intervene and deliver justice redressing matters of Consumers interest and dispute.

4. Another important objection of the Opposite Party is that they do not have on office at Bargarh so can not be tried here and not triable under Consumer Protection Act-1986. Question here come to mind that how they collected the sum delivery of vehicle and other processes of the financing if have no place of business here at Bargarh contention rejected.

5. It is seen from the documents that the money repaid through different forms like direct cash deposits, bank deposits, check encashments. Opposite Party allowed all the farms so can not allege violation of terms and conditions of the loan agreement.

6. From analysis of the documents filed by the Opposite Party it seems that a lot of discrepancies occurred at their end as follows when compared with the receipts filed by the Complainant.

    

For the installment for the month of January - 2010 many receipt shows payment of Rs.8,700/-(Rupees eight thousand seven hundred)only as agreed but collection is shown to be of only Rs.8,352/-(Rupees eight thousand three hundred fifty two)only and outstanding balance is shown as Rs.348/-(Rupees three hundred forty eight)only further this is not communicated to the Complainant the payment schedule, collection dates differ in many instances and though receipt is made to the Complainants for Rs.8,700/-(Rupees eight thousand seven hundred)only the collection shows in the statement is less amount and it is continuous. So it is foul play with handling of the account addition to this when the money receipt copies filed by the Complainant were referred it is found that there are money receipts available for all 47(forty seven) installments all of them are for Rs.8,700/-( Rupees eight thousand seven hundred)only and prior to the date fixed for payment of Installment that is 21^st of each month. Two receipts shows payment of Rs.9,000/-(Rupees nine thousand)only each and on additional receipt shows payment of Rs.2,500/-(Rupees two thousand five hundred)only. So under the circumstances calculating collections as per their suitability is not fair and levying additional changes is unfair to the customer. It is also seen that though all the money receipts available are Opposite Party either prior to the due installment date on the some date why delayed collection is shown is not explained and raised doubts about intentions.

From the perusal of the receipt information provided by the Opposite Party it does not come similar to the money receipts made available by the Complainant and charges created and demanded along wish interest and interest on interest is unfair trade practice when company is not giving interest benefit on advance payments.

Under the circumstance Opposite Party is charged of deficiency of service for not handling the account fairly, not taking interest in redressing the grievance of the consumer and putting him to undue problem of litigation.

                                                                                                    O R D E R

Under above discaused facts and circumstance Forum orders following.

1. Opposite Party is directed not to demand any money from the Complainant for Loan Account No. 5000357113 and close the Loan Account with No dues pending.

2. Issue No Due Certificate to this Complainant within two months.

3. Opposite Party will pay on amount of Rs.2,000/-(Rupees two thousand)only further to the Complainant within two month of the order, failing which this award amount of para No.3(three) will carry 10% interest per amount till final realization.

Typed to my dictation

and corrected by me.

( Smt. Anjali Behera)

M e m b e r (w).

I agree,

(Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash)

M e m b e r.