Orissa

Cuttak

CC/72/2018

Monoj Behera - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager,Bajaj Finance Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

N K Dash & associates

05 Apr 2023

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C.No.72/2018

          Manoj Behera @ Manoj Behera

S/O:Alekha Behera,

At:Bagjira.,P.O:Bhagbanpur,

Dist:Cuttack.                                                                     ... Complainant.

          Vrs.

 

1.       The Manager,Bajaj Finance Ltd.,Bajaj Finserv,                                                                                                                             4^th floor,Survey No 208/1-B,Viman Nagar,Pune,                                                                                                                                   Maharastra-411014,India

 

2.      The  Manager,Bajaj Finserv, 3^rd floor,ICICI Building

A/31,Bhanjo Prava Bhawan,Unit-3,

Kharvel Nagar,Bhubaneswar,Odisha

3.     The Manager, Bajaj Finserv,

Sreema Construction, N.H-5,

Naya Chowk,Madhupatna,Dist:Cuttack.

 

4.      M/s. Tarini Auto Centre (authorised Bajaj vehicles sub-delear),                                                                                                           At-Machhuati,Slipur,Dist-Cuttack                                                                       ...Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:            Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                             Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    13.07.2018

Date of Order:  05.04.2023

 

For the complainant:                    Mr. N.K.Dash,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps no.1,2 & 3 :             Mr. R.K.Sahoo,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.P no.4       :                   Mr. R.K.Pattnaik,Adv. & Associates.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President                        

Case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition in short is that he had purchased a Bajaj Pulsar two-wheeler vehicle bearing Regd. No.OD-05-AA-5823 with Chassis noMD2A11CY8HRL15879 and Engine no.DHYRHL02299 after obtaining finance from O.P no.1 to the tune of Rs.64,000/- on 26.4.2017.  The said loan amount was to be repaid by him in 24 number of E.M.Is @ Rs.3299/-.  He had paid Rs.32,700/- to O.P no.4 at the time of purchasing the said two-wheeler.  He had paid seven number of E.M.Is through the employees of O.P no.1 and when he decided to foreclose his loan account, to his dismay, he came to know that an amount more than the cost of the vehicle is still pending to be repaid by him.  According to the complainant, O.P no.1 is demanding heavy amount from him illegally and arbitrarily without informing him properly nor sending any notice to him and not even showing any document to him in that aspect.  It is for this, the complainant has claimed for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards compensation from the O.Ps.

          Together with his complaint petition, the complainant has filed copies of documents relating to the R.C. book of the purchased vehicle and a copy of the money receipt showing an amount of Rs.32,700/- has been received from him on 12.4.2017 by O.P no.4.

2.       On the other hand, though the O.Ps have contested this case but O.Ps no.1,2 & 3 have jointly filed their written version whereas O.P no.4 has filed his separate written version.  As it appears from the written version of O.Ps no.1,2 & 3, they admit about the purchase of the Bajaj Pulsar motorcycle by the complainant bearing Regd. No.OD-05-AA-5823 for which they had extended financial assistance to the tune of Rs.79,176/-  to him which includes the principal amount of loan ofRs.64,000/- alongwith other charges of Rs.15,176/-.  The monthly instalment as agreed was of Rs.1614/- which was effective from 3.6.2017 and to be ending on 3.5.2019 for a period of 24 months.  The complainant had remitted an amount of Rs.3299/- towards the first advance E.M.I.  They also admit that the complainant has remitted a sum of Rs.23,093/- towards seven number of E.M.Is out of the twenty instalments as on 3.1.2019.  But they urge that being a defaulter, the complainant had grossly violated the agreed terms and conditions of the loan agreement.  Thus, it is the contention of O.Ps no.1,2 & 3 that an outstanding due of Rs.42,887/- towards E.M.I arrears and a sum of Rs.14,495/- towards other overdue charges is still pending to be repaid by the complainant.  The said O.Ps had issued demand notice to the complainant to that effect but though the complainant had received the same on 6.3.18, he had failed to regularise the loan account.  The said O.Ps thereafter had issued loan recall notice dt.3.4.18 demanding the complainant to close the loan account but the complainant by not doing so has continued to become a defaulter and thereby had violated the agreed terms and conditions of the loan agreement.  According to these O.Ps, there is no deficiency of service on their part nor had they practised any unfair trade and rather according to them, the case of the complainant is not maintainable which is liable to be dismissed.

          Together with their written version, the O.Ps no.1,2 & 3 have filed copies of several documents including loan agreement copy.

          O.P no.4 through his written version has stated that the complainant has wrongly added him as a party in this case which is not maintainable rather the same is liable to be dismissed for misjoinder of party as because no cause of action lies against him.

3.       Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of the written versions of the O.Ps, this Commission thinks it proper to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a proper conclusion here in this case.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and if they had practised any unfair trade ?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?

 

Issue no.ii.

Out of the three issues, issue no.ii  being the pertinent issue in this case, is taken up  first for consideration here.

After perusing the contents of the averments as made in the complaint petition, both the written versions and after perusing the copies of documents as available in the case record, it is noticed that admittedly, the complainant had purchased a Bajaj Pulsar motorcycle by obtaining loan from O.P no.1.  He had also executed the loan agreement thereby had abided to the terms and conditions therein.  According to him, he had repaid the total amount and had gone for foreclosure of the loan account.  He could know that there is still huge amount pending to be repaid by him and according to him, the O.Ps are arbitrarily and illegally demanding huge amount of money from him.  Per contra, the O.Ps no.1,2 & 3 have filed copy of the loan agreement specifying the details of loan therein and the amount still pending to be repaid by the complainant which includes the overdue charges etc.  Thus, the contention of the complainant that the O.Ps are charging illegally and arbitrarily huge amount from him does not hold good here in this case.  As such, this Commission do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and also cannot conclude that the O.Ps have practised unfair trade.  Accordingly, this issue goes in favour of the O.Ps.

Issues no.i & iii.

From the discussions as made above, it can never be said here in this case that the case of the complainant is maintainable and the complainant is entitled to any of the reliefs as claimed by him. Hence it is so ordered:

ORDER

Case is dismissed on contest against the O.Ps and as regards to the facts and circumstances of the case without any cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 5^th day of April,2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission.          

                                                                                                                            Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                       President

 

 

 

                                                                                                        Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                             Member