Govinda Padhan, - Complainant(s)


Branch Manager, Bank of India - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. P.K. Dora Adv. & Associates

08 Jan 2024


District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Sambalpur
Near, SBI Main Branch, Sambalpur
Uploaded by Office Assistance
Complaint Case No. CC/146/2023
( Date of Filing : 22 Sep 2023 )
1. Govinda Padhan,
Aged about 31 years, S/O- Pradip Padhan, R/O/Ps-Katarbaga, Dist-Sambalpur,Odisha-768212
1. Branch Manager, Bank of India
Ainthapali Branch Sambalpur-768004
 HON'BLE MR. Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Sadananda Tripathy MEMBER
Dated : 08 Jan 2024
Final Order / Judgement


                             CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 146/2023


Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,


Govinda Padhan,

S/O- Pradip Padhan,

R/O/Ps-Katarbaga, Dist-Sambalpur, Odisha-768212    ….…......Complainant.


Branch Manager, Bank of India

Ainthapali Branch

Sambalpur-768004                                                                 …………........Opp.Party



  1. For the Complainant         :- Sri. P.K. Dora Adv. & Associates
  2. For the O.P.                        :- Sri. H.C. Dani, Adv. & Associates


Date of Filing: 22.09.2023,Date of Hearing : 21.11.2023,Date of Judgement : 08.01.2024


  Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT

  1. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant purchased a Maruti Suziki India Model S Fresso VXI vehicle for Rs. 5,45,000/- from odyssey Motors Pvt. Ltd., Sambalpur by paying cash of Rs. 95,000/- and rest amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- taking  a loan from the O.P. The O.P. opened and A/C No. 549510110001807 on 30.01.2021 in the name of Complainant. EMI of Rs. 9200/- was fixed and Rs. 1,40,992/- on 14 occasions O.P. has been paid.

In January, 2023 after payment of Rs. 20,000/- due to some medical problem of his mother, death of father and damage in cultivation Complainant could not go to the O.P. and was requested to defer the payment for sometime. On 08.06.2023 the Complainant was in his house at Katarbaga, the Staff of O.P. entered into his house and forcibly took away the vehicle No. OR 15T 1717. The vehicle was seized without intimation illegally and kept under open sky. After several request also the O.P. refused to give delivery although the Complainant was ready to pay the dues. The Complainant filed an interim application in this case bearing I.A. Case No. 29/2023 and the Complainant was directed to pay Rs. 30,000/- to the O.P. On 25.09.2023 within three days. Further the O.P. was directed not to make any auction sale and to release the vehicle. The Complainant went to the O.P. to deposit Rs. 30,000/- but the O.P. refused to receive. The Complainant approached the Zonal office of the O.P. at Sarlakani Chowk but they also remained aloof. For which the Complainant filed violation Misc. Case No. 9/2023 on 29.09.2023 before this Commission.

  1. The O.P. after appearance in reply submitted that finance of Rs. 4,50,000/- to the Complainant was made but the Complainant was irregular in his payment. After 14 EMIs Rs. 20,000/- has been deposited by the Complainant. Repeated notices and telephonic calls have been made by the O.P. for repayment but the Complainant with malafide intention remained silent. Notice dated 31.05.2023 was issued but no reply was given by Complainant. The seizure agent was sent on 30.06.2022 but the agent for protest of Complainant could not seize the vehicle. Again on 23.03.2023 seizure agent with intimation to Ainthapali police seized the vehicle. The Bank issued another notice on 17.09.2023 to the Complainant which was published in news paper and auction procedure is responsibilities of Zonal office. On 25.09.2023 the interim order was served to the O.P. and by the time auction had been completed. There is no any violation of the order of the Commission and due procedures have been followed by the O.P. for auction sale.
  2. The Complainant filed the following documents:
  1. Sale invoice dated 30.01.2021 of Mariti Suzuki Arena.
  2. R.C. book copy of vehicle No. OD-15T-1717
  3. Account Statement A/C No. 549460510000159.

The O.P. filed the following documents:

  1. Account Statement A/C No. 549460510000159.
  2. Notice of demand dated 31.05.2022.
  3. Letter of assignment for seizure of vehicle dated 30.06.2022.
  4. Letter of assignment for seizure of vehicle dated 23.03.2023.
  5. Preliminary intimation for seizure of vehicle financed dated 22.05.2023.
  6. Sale notice of the vehicle dated 17.09.2023.
  7. The statesmen dated 17.09.2023.
  8. The Prameya dated 17.09.2023.
  1. Perused the documents filed by both the parties and their statement. The Complainant examined himself as a witness and cross-examined by the O.P. From the account Statement filed it reveals that the Complainant has paid the EMIs till 01.06.2022 in an irregular way but Rs. 20,000/- was paid on 27.01.2023. By that time the outstanding balance against Complainant was Rs. 3,74,079.00. From demand notice dated 31.05.2022 it reveals that demand of Rs. 3,82,070/- was made till 28.02.2022. From 30.06.2022 notice of O.P. it reveals that M/S N.Meher & Co. Seizure Agent was assigned to seize the vehicle upto 31.07.2022. In notice dated 23.03.2023 M/S R.Das & Co. Cuttack was assigned to seize the vehicle by 24.04.2023. Vide letter dated 17.09.2023 sale notice was given to the Complainant fixing 25.09.2023, 11.00AM to 1.00PM and Reserve price was fixed Rs. 3,00,000/-. Registration receipt has been attached to the notice. The O.P. also filed copy of Newspaper, the Statesman dated 17.09.2023 and Prameya dated 17.09.2023 wherein auction sale was fixed on 25.09.2023.
  2. The O.P. is a nationalised Bank and it is supposed that in each and every action of the Bank due procedure should be taken by the Bank. The Complainant admits that after 27.01.2023 no any amount has been paid to the O.P. due to his personal family problems. When the Complainant failed to pay the over dues demand notice has been issued by the O.P. but no any acknowledgement of the Complainant has been filed. Likewise, the O.P. admitted that M/S N.Meher & Co. and M/S R.Das & Co. Recovery Agent have been appointed. On 22.05.2023 the O.P. informed the I.I.C Katarbaga P.S. about appointment of M/S R.Das & Co. whereas no any seizure document was filed by the O.P. which seizing alleged vehicle the O.P. has not followed due procedure only for that reason it is not file before the Commission about date, place, person/witness present etc, which is a major irregularity on the part of the O.P.

Secondly, the O.P. submitted the sale notice dated 17.09.2023 which is issued to the Complainant with registration receipt. The sale was within the knowledge of the Complainant. The O.P. published the date of auction in Newspaper along with place and time but failed to submit the auction bid-sheet, who were the participants and what was highest bid. The O.P. failed to submit the details of auction, which is also a major irregularity in auction sale.

Thirdly, after the auction sale, the O.P. not submitted any post sale notice and fate of the highest auction-bid amount and adjustment in loan account nor submitted any notice after auction sale. From the supra discussion it is clear that the O.P. has not followed due procedures of seizure nor auction sale of vehicle No. OD-15T-1717, which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of O.P.

  1. The Complainant failed to establish that prior to 25.09.2023 11.00 AM to 1.00PM (auction sale period) order of this Commission dated 25.09.2023 was served. In this regard neither nay documentary evidence nor oral evidence has been filed. Accordingly the violation Misc. Case No. 9/2023 is disposed of.
  2. Taking into consideration the circumstances of the Complainant it is established that the O.P. although has every right to seize the alleged vehicle failed to prove that due procedure has been followed. Likewise, the auction sale procedure and post-sale activities proves the deficiency in service of the O.P. and it is unfair trade practice. As the vehicle has been sold and recovery of vehicle is not possible at this juncture.

Accordingly, it is ordered:


The complaint is allowed partly against the O.P. The O.P. is directed to refund the total amount paid by the Complainant. i.e. Rs. 1,60,992/- along with interest @12% P.A. w.e.f. 25.09.2023 within one month of this order. In case of non-payment the amount will carry 18% interest till realisation. For deficiency in service and unfair trade practice the O.P. is directed to pay Rs. 50,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs. 10,000/- to the Complainant.

Order pronounced in the open court on 8th day of Jan 2023.

Supply free copy to the parties.

[HON'BLE MR. Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy]
[HON'BLE MR. Sadananda Tripathy]

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!


Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number


Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.