Ld Advocates for the parties are present. Judgement is ready. It is pronounced in open commission. 

BY -SRI. SAURAV CHANDRA, MEMBER

1. Brief facts of the Complainant’s case are that the Opposite Party No.1 to 3 are the Transport Finance-cum-Insurance Company from whom the Complainant took a Vehicle Loan on 26.09.2012 vide Loan A/c No.TAMLK0507030003 against Vehicle No.WB29A-5728 and Opposite Party No.4 is a Police Station at Bankura.

2. During taking the loan the Complainant having details discussion with Op No.1 regarding every terms, procedure and conditions and accordingly it was made clear to all the parties that the Complainant will start and continue insurance policy through National Insurance Co. Ltd. in respect of the said vehicle.

3. Thereafter, on the basis of such such discussion, the Complainant & Op No.1 signed all papers and documents including the Loan-cum-Hypothecation Agreement dated: 3^rd July 2015. Accordingly, Ops Company calculated the EMI and the Complainant regularly had been paying the same without any default.

4. Suddenly on 27.09.2018, the Complainant received a combined notice for Renewal of Insurance Policy No.10003/31/19/302671 from the Op No.2 & 3 against the loan of the vehicle in which the Complainant had no knowledge or prior intimation.

5. For that reason the Complainant contacted the Ops’ Company and surprisingly came to know, this different Insurance Policy is going on with the loan in Ops’ Company i.e. Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. and a huge amount is pending against it.

6. Being astonished, the Complainant complained the Ops’ Company for non-agreement with this hidden policy and to stop immediately but, the Ops’ Company did not pay any hid and since then the Complainant is knocking the door of Ops’ branch to branch. Moreover, the Ops Company regularly sending SMS for informing the due/overdue in respect of the said policy whereas Ops’ Company had to stop and erase all claim.

7. Stating the above facts, the Complainant sent a legal notice to the Op No.1 to 3 on 16.04.2019 but, neither had they replied nor any step has been taken. Lastly on 30.05.2019, the Complainant went to the office of the Op No.1 where he was threatened and physically assaulted.

8. On 19.07.2019, the Complainant and his driver were surrounded by the appointed goons of the Op No.1 to 3 at Bankura Town and unlawfully detained the vehicle for a demand of illegitimate due amount when Complainant was moving for his personal work. Complainant denied to pay the same and shown all relevant papers, documents of this case which arose from illegal insurance claim against the Vehicle No.WB/29A-5728 but, they did not pay any hid instead physically assaulted with using un-parliamentary languages and seized the vehicle by issuing a Re-Possession Vehicle Inventory List on the same date i.e. on 19.07.2019.

9. Thereafter, the Complainant went to the local police station for recovery of the Re-Possessed vehicle but, the concern Police Station refused to take any complaint.

10. Being aggrieved, he returned back with the Re-Possession Vehicle Inventory List and next two days ran from the office of the Op No.1 to 3 but, they also driven out the Complainant with inhuman behavior.

11. The cause of action of this case arose on 16.04.2019 and 30.05.2019 respectively.

The Complainant, therefore, prays for:-

1. To stop the unknown Insurance Policy and its’ all calculated amount by erasing all claims by the Op No.1 to 3.

2. To pay a Compensation of Rs.35,000.00 for mental shock, pain, agony including mental, physical, financial loss and harassment by the Op No.1 to 3.

12. The Op No.1 to 3 being represented by its’ Learned Advocate have contested the case with filing Written Version against the Complaint. While resisting the claim of the Complainant, the Op No.1 to 3 in its’ Written Version stated inter alia that this complaint is not maintainable in its present form and in law because the Complainant will start and continue insurance through the National Insurance Co. Ltd. in respect of that vehicle are totally false, baseless, vague on the motive to make a false story for getting benefit from the instance case.

13. The Complainant was found to be tardy in making payment of his dues from the first installment and due to delay payment of EMIs finally it is found that the payment of him is sporadic in nature. Despite numerous demand/reminders, the said Complainant has deliberately failed to adhere to the Terms & Conditions and defaulted in making the payment with malafide/dishonest intention.

14. Moreover, as per the Terms & Conditions of the Agreement, the insurance of the vehicle shall be in joint name i.e. Complainant and Op Company and copy of the Original Insurance Policy and Renewal Notes shall be deposited with the Op. The Complainant shall duly and punctually pay all the premium on such policies as and when due and shall produce to the Op Company. The Complainant shall ensure that such policies of insurance are kept alive during the subsistence, but the Complainant did not maintain as per terms of the agreement.

15. The Complainant submitted an application with a request to cancel the Insurance Policy No.10003/31/19/302671 along with the National Insurance Co. Ltd. Policy before the Op Office at Howrah and on the basis of such application, the said policy has already been cancelled by the Op on 13.10.2018 by refunding the deducted premium amount to the Complainant. The Complainant willingly with malafide intention is trying to avoid payment and to evade the dues for escaping the liability by hook and cook.

16. The Complainant does not pay the arrear amount as per the Terms & Conditions of this Agreement and till 31.10.2019 the due amount was Rs.87,432.00.

17. Notices were duly served upon the Op No.1 to 4 but, Op No.4 preferred to see that the case be decided ex-parte against them.

18. Under the above circumstances, the Op No.1 to 3 has prayed for dismissal of the present case with compensatory costs from the Complainant.

19. Points for determination are:

1. Is the case maintainable in its present form and in law? 
2. Is the Complainant entitled to the relief(s) as sought for?

20. Decision with reasons

1. Both the points I and II, being inter related to each other, are taken up together for discussion for sake of brevity and convenience.

2. We have carefully perused the Petition of the Complainant alongwith all papers and other documents.

21. Having regards had to the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of evidence, it is evident that there is no dispute that Complainant is a consumer having grievances against the OPs, as such the case is maintainable in its present form and in law.

22. In the instant case, the Complainant submitted Four (04)Listsof Documents, dated: 21.06.2019, 31.07.2019, 09.01.2023 and 19.01.2023 respectively containing the copies of Legal Notice dated: 18.04.2019 by the Ld. Advocate of the Complainant to the Op No.1 to 3, a combined Insurance Policy Renewal Intimation Letter from Op No.2 & 3, dated:27.09.2018 against Loan No.TAMLK0507030003, Repossession Vehicle Inventory List dated:19.07.2019, Complaint Letter dated: 26.07.2019 before the Bankura Police Station with Original Postal Receipt dated: 29.07.2019, Statement of Vehicle Loan Account with the Op for the period 03.07.2015 to 04.06.2019, 47 Loan EMI Receipts with a summary from 05.08.2015 to 05.06.2019 amounting to Rs.3,74,417.00, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Eight (08) Policies from 12.09.2014 to 12.12.2022.

23. The Op No.1 to 3 also submitted the copies of Loan-cum-Hypothecation Agreement dated: 03.07.2015, Package Policy Endorsement Schedule for the period 13.10.2018 to 11.09.2019 by the Op Company, Cancellation Request Form duly acknowledged with the Seal of the Op Company along with the copy of NICL Policy for the period 12.09.2019 to 11.09.2019, Statement of Vehicle Loan Account for the period 03.07.2015 to 31.10.2019 with a total outstanding of Rs.87,432.64, Default Notice dated: 03.07.2019 for Rs.67,277.00.

24. From the above submitted documents, some facts are noticed by this Commission as follows :-

1. That as per Terms & Conditions Clause No.3.8 (a), (b) and (c) of the Loan cum Hypothecation Agreement at Page No.4 :-

1. The Borrower shall keep the Hypothecation assets fully and comprehensively insured from time to time against all risks such as accident, fire, arson, lightning, riots, civil, commotion, war, theft, pilferage, third party liabilities and such other risks as may be stipulated by Shriram from time to time, to the extent of full market value thereof. The insurance shall be in joint names of the Borrower and Shriram and the original policies of insurance and renewal notices shall be deposited with Shriram. The Borrower shall duly and punctually pay all the premia on such policies as and when due and shall produce to Shriram for inspection the original receipts and furnish duly certified copies thereof for Shriram record. The Borrower shall insure that such policies of insurance are kept alive during the subsistence of these security and the Borrower shall not do or permit to be done anything by reason of which such instances may be cancelled.

2. On default of the Borrower to keep the Hypothecated assets insured as aforesaid, Shriram may. At its discretion, but without any obligation to do so, effect insurance of the Hypothecated assets and/or pay the premia in respect thereof and the Borrower hereby undertakes to reimburse Shriramon demand all the amounts paid and/or incurred by Shriram in doing so and on default of payment of such amounts by the Borrower, Shriram shall be at the liberty to debit such amounts to the accounts of the Borrower with Shriram and such amounts shall carry interest at the same rates as provided in the schedule III hereto.

3. If any amount is received from an insurance company under any policy or policies of insurance the amount so realized may, at the sole discretion of Shriram, be utilized in replacement of the lost or damaged Hypothecated assets or in liquidation of the liability of the Borrower to Shriram under these presents.

2. Therefore, it is the duty of the Complainant to obtain Insurance Policy against the loaned Vehicle No.WB-29A-5728 and intimate the same with supporting documents to the Op Company, else the Op is at liberty to renew the Insurance Policy on its’ own and subsequently reimburse the premium from the Complainant.

3. In the submitted documents it is observed that the Op No.2 and 3 sent a combined intimation letter dated: 17.09.2018 to the Complainant about Renewed  Comprehensive Insurance Package Policy No.10003/31/19/302671 against Loan No.TAMLK0507030003, Hypothecated Vehicle No.WB-29A-5728for the period 12.09.2018 to 11.09.2019 with a request to submit copy of the policy within 7 days from the policy commencement date, otherwise it will be treat that the policy issued from the Op No.2 & 3’s end is accepted by the Complainant and the Complainant are agreeable to pay the premium and interest (from Policy Effective Date). In turn the Complainant submitted Op Company’s Package Policy Cancellation Request with a copy of self-purchased NICL Policy for the same period before the Haldia Branch of the Op Company and accordingly the Op cancelled the said Package Policy by refunding the premium amount in full for Rs.20,013.00 on 15.10.2018 as reflected in Page No.4 of the Statement of Accounts.

4. From the above, it is clear that obtaining Vehicle Insurance Policy is the criteria here and not the Insurance Company from which it is purchased and therefore, the Op did not compel the Complainant to purchase the policy from his own Company rather cancelled the Op Company’s Renewed Insurance Policy and refunded the premium amount in full.

25. Regarding seizure of Vehicle by the Ops’ Goons, this Commission has not found cogent evidence. No relief as regards the recovery of vehicle has been claimed in this case.

26. Under the above facts and circumstances as mentioned above, this Commission doesn’t find any elements of deficiency in service caused by the Op No.1 to 3.

27. Therefore, the Complainant is not at all entitled to get any relief against the Ops.

28. Both the points are disposed of accordingly.

3.  Thus, the complaint case does not succeed.

Hence, it is

          O R D E R E D

That the CC-434 of 2019 be and the same is dismissed on contest against the Ops.

No Order as to cost is passed.

Let a copy of this judgment be provided to the parties free of cost. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.

File be consigned to record section along with a copy of this   judgment.