Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/939/2016

M/s Allena Auto Industries Pvt. Ltd., - Complainant(s)

Versus

Toyota Financial Services India Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Deepak Aggarwal Adv.

01 Jan 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	939 of 2016
Date  of  Institution	:	02.11.2016
Date   of   Decision	:	01.01.2018

 

 

 

 

M/s Allena Auto Industries Pvt. Ltd.,  Plot   No.C-116, Industrial Area, Phase-7, Mohali, through its Authorised Signatory Sh.Arvind Kumar.       

             …..Complainant

Versus

1]  Toyota Financial Services India Limited, C/o M/s Pioneer Toyota, Plot No.177H-I, Industrial Area Phase-I, Chandigarh through its Director.

    Registered Office:

    Toyota Financial Services India Limited, 12^th Floor, RG Tower, Wazirpur District Centre, Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, New Delhi 110034, through its Director.

….. Opposite Parties 

 

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

                               

 

 

Argued By   :     Sh.Deepak Aggarwal, Adv. for the complainant

:     Sh.Hardeep Singh Saini, Adv. for Opposite Party

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

          As per the case, the complainant company purchased vehicle Toyota Innova bearing No.CH-01BD-0612 from M/s Pioneer Toyota, Indl.Area, Phase-1, Chandigarh on 29.7.2015 for an amount of Rs.15,00,455/- plus Rs.3500/- towards logistic charges and got it insured with ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company valid from 29.7.2015 to 28.7.2016 (Ann.C-1 colly.).  It is averred that the said vehicle of the complainant was duly financed by Opposite Party to the tune of Rs.13.00 lacs.  It is also averred that the said insured vehicle of the complainant was stolen in the night of 8.1.2016, which was intimated to the police as well as insurance company.  Accordingly, an FIR No.868, dated 9.1.2016 was registered at Police Station e-Police Station M.V.Theft, New Delhi (Ann.C-2).  Thereafter, a claim was lodged with the insurance company and the insurance was duly settled it for a total sum of Rs.14,23,432/-.  It is averred that the insurance company paid the said amount of Rs.14,23,432/- to the OP Finance Company because the vehicle was under hypothecation with it.  It is also averred that the Opposite Party Company after deducting the loan amount from the total sum of Rs.14,23,432/-, was to refund the balance amount of Rs.4,45,428/- to the complainant.  However, the Opposite Party illegally deducted/charged Rs.48,644/ as 5% foreclosure charges on the outstanding loan amount and refunded only Rs.3,96,783/-.  The complainant raised the issue with the Opposite Party but to no avail.  Hence, alleging the said act of the Opposite Party as deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, this complaint has been filed.

 

2]       The Opposite Party has filed reply and while admitting the factual matrix of the case, stated that the complainant was liable to pay pre-payment charges as per Clause 3.8.1 of the agreement.  It is also stated that the said deduction has been made only as per the terms and conditions of the agreement duly executed by the complainant. Pleading no deficiency in service and denying other allegations, it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

 

3]       Rebuttal/Replication has also been filed by the complainant thereby reiterating the assertions as made in the complaint and controverting that of Opposite Party made in the reply.

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the OPs and have also perused the entire record.

 

6]       Admittedly, the vehicle in question, which was financed by the complainant from the Opposite Party got stolen and the claim of insurance was settled, resultantly, an amount of Rs.14,23,432/- was paid by the insurance company, which was put at the disposal of the OP Finance Company for the satisfaction of the loan amount, with request to refund the excess amount to the complainant, after due satisfaction of the balance loan amount. The Opposite Party Company after adjustment of the loan amount of the complainant from the amount received from the insurance company, instead of refunding the balance amount of Rs.4,45,428/- refunded only an amount of Rs.3,96,783/- after deducting Rs.48,644/- as pre-payment/foreclosure charges.  The Opposite Party in order to justify the deduction of an amount of Rs.48,644/- as foreclosure charges out of the balance amount of the complainant, referred Clause No.3.8.1 of the Loan Agreement (Ann.R-1).  The said clause is reproduced as under:-

“In case of pre-payment of the loan by the applicant TFSIN shall charge as additional charges as mentioned in schedule I which shall be lower of either the “pre-payment charge” or the interest outstanding as on the day of repayment”.

 

7]       We are of the concerted view that the Opposite Party has illegally deducted the disputed amount on account of pre-payment charges taking recourse to Clause 3.8.1 of the Loan Agreement.  The given case is not a voluntary closure of the loan account, rather it is an exceptional case, where unfortunately the vehicle financed, got stolen and the insurance company settled the insurance claim of the complainant and paid the amount to the finance company i.e. Opposite Party for settlement of the loan amount with further request to refund the balance excess amount to the complainant. Thus, under the given situation and circumstances, the deduction make by the Opposite Party company as pre-payment charges, is held to be totally illegal and unjustified. Hence, the deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party is writ large.

 

8]        In view of the above findings, the complaint is allowed against Opposite Party with direction to refund an amount of Rs.48,644/- to the complainant, along with  a lump sum amount of Rs.12,000/- towards compensation, for causing harassment due to their deficient services and litigation expenses, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which it shall also be liable to pay additional cost of Rs.10,000/-, apart from the above awarded relief.

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

1^st January, 2018                                                                                                                                                                             Sd/-

(RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER