Order No. 11 dt. 18/07/2017
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant entered into an agreement with o.p. company to avail financial assistance in the form of loan to purchase a car being no.WB 02X 6299. In the loan agreement it was decided that the complainant would pay the EMI @ Rs.14,710/- and the amount is to be liquidated in 59 installments. It was agreed that the monthly installments to be paid through ECS but due to certain technical problems the account payee cheque was issued by the complainant though honoured but it was not reflected in the payment towards the said installment. The complainant also stated that he failed to pay the EMI regularly after payment of some EMIs as per the said agreement. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps. to deliver the papers as well as the NOC related to the hypothecation of the car and pay compensation of Rs.90,000/-.
The o.ps. contested this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that as per the loan agreement it was decided that in the event of delay in making payment of EMI the borrower / complainant has to pay overdue interest for that period. The o.ps. asked for the overdue interest which is very much permissible as per the hire purchase agreement executed between the complainant and o.p. no.1. Before filing of this case o.p. no.1 informed the complainant through e-mail to pay the overdue interest of Rs.49,858.14 which was received by the complainant and the complainant replied the said e-mail asking for clarification from o.p. thereafter the complainant filed this case. So long the overdue interest and other charges are not paid by the complainant, the NOC cannot be issued. On the basis of the said fact o.ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:
- Whether the complainant took loan from o.p. no.1?
- Whether the complainant paid the EMI regularly?
- Whether there was any overdue interest to be paid by the complainant to o.p. no.1?
- Whether o.p. no.1 is duty bound to issue NOC in spite of not receiving the overdue interest?
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of o.ps.?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons:
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant in order to purchase the car took the loan from o.p. no.1 and a loan agreement was entered into between the parties. On the basis of the said loan agreement the complainant paid the EMIs but due to the fault on the part of the system of the bank some amount was not credited in the account of o.p. no.1, subsequently the complainant also failed to pay some EMIs and on the basis of the said fact the complainant though paid the entire loan amount but o.ps. have not issued the NOC and all the papers relating to the said vehicle. On the basis of the said fact ld. lawyer prayed for direction upon the o.ps. for issuance of NOC as well as the papers relating to the said vehicle to the complainant and to pay compensation.
Ld. lawyer for the o.ps. argued that as per the loan agreement it was decided that the EMIs are to be paid within stipulated time as mentioned in the said loan agreement. The complainant himself has admitted that he has failed to pay the EMIs regularly in respect of some installments. Though the complainant claimed that he paid the entire amount but from the bank statement it is found that there is overdue interest to the tune of Rs.49,858.14. The said overdue interest was informed to the complainant and the complainant replied the information of o.ps. and sought for clarification. Before getting any reply from o.ps. the complainant filed this case. There was no deficiency in service on the part of o.ps. and as such, o.ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainant took loan from o.p. no.1 and a loan agreement was entered into between the parties and the complainant would pay EMI @ Rs.14,710/-. It is also found from the materials on record that the complainant admitted that he failed to pay the EMI regularly. In order to fortify the claim of o.p. no.1 regarding the overdue interest from the complainant the statement of account including the bank statement wherefrom it is evident that the complainant paid the EMIs not as per the terms and conditions of the said loan agreement. Though it was decided that the EMI has to be paid within 1st day of each succeeding month and the EMI commenced from the month of 1.6.07, but the complainant paid the amount beyond the period of the of the date fixed as mentioned in the loan agreement. On the basis of the said fact o.ps. naturally asked for the unpaid interest for which the said amount was sought for from the complainant which accumulated to Rs.49,858.14. The said fact was informed to the complainant and the complainant also sought for clarification but before getting such clarification the complainant filed this case. From the materials on record it appears that the complainant failed to comply with stipulation in the loan agreement and therefore, overdue interest accrued. Since the complainant did not come with clean hands and suppressed the material fact, therefore no direction can be given upon the o.ps. for issuing NOC or for handing over the relevant papers in respect of the vehicle to the complainant. In view of the facts and circumstances as stated above, we hold that there was no deficiency in service on the part of o.ps. and the complainant will not be entitled to get any relief as prayed for. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered,
That the CC No.178/2014 is dismissed on contest without cost against the o.ps.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
