BEFORE THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NUH (MEWAT).
Complaint No. 10 of 2015
Date of Instt:-2.9.2015
Date of Decision:-23.5.2017
Salmuddin son of Suleman, aged 38 years, resident of village Noorpur, Tehsil Tauru, District Mewat.
.......Complainant
Versus
Shri Ram Transport Finance Ltd. Sohna Delhi Alwar Road 1st Floor, Corporation Bank, Sohna through its Branch Manager.
......Opposite party
Complaint under Section 12 of
Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Before:- Sh. Rajbir Singh Dahiya, President
Smt. Urmil Beniwal, Member
Smt. Keeran Bala, Member
Present:- Sh. Naseem Ahmad, Adv. for the complainant.
Opposite party already ex parte.
Order:- ( R.S. Dahiya, President)
The facts of the complaint in brief are that the complainant is a registered owner of truck bearing registration No. HR-55/G-8969 which was financed with the opposite party. The complainant paid the monthly installment to the opposite party in time. It is alleged that the opposite party is adamant to receive the whole finance amount in one installment form the complainant. It is further alleged that the opposite party snatched the aforesaid vehicle from the driver of the complainant in the area of Nuh. Thereafter, the complainant again and again visited the office of the opposite party for getting the aforesaid vehicle, but all in vain. Hence, it is prayed that the opposite party be directed to return the aforesaid vehicle to the complainant.
2. Notice was issued to the opposite party, but none was appeared despite elapsed of 30 days, so the opposite party was proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 10.2.2016.
3. In evidence, the complainant has produced his own affidavit Ex. CW1, copy of loan summary Ex. CW2, copy of detail of token tax Ex. CW3 and copy of loan receipt Ex. CW4 and closed the evidence.
4. After going through the averments made in the complaint as well as in the affidavit of the complainant Ex. CW1, this Forum is unable to accept the story put forward by the complainant. The averments made in the complaint as well as in the affidavit require a proportionate and reasonable proof of jurisdiction of this Forum. The alleged snatching of vehicle by the finance company who finance the vehicle No. HR-55/G-8969 does not attract the definition of service given under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and as such this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint. So the complaint of the complainant is dismissed being without jurisdiction of this Forum, however, this Forum allows the liberty to initiate his cause before the competent Court/ Authorities/Tribunal. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced on 23.5.2017
President
Member Member District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum/Nuh (Mewat)
23.5.2017
