Orissa

Jajapur

CC/51/2017

Arun Kumar Rout - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager,L & T Finance Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Ashok Ku Biswal,R.L Biswal

20 Dec 2019

ORDER

 IN  THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.

                                                        Present:      1.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,

                                                                            2.Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.                     

                                             Dated the 20th day of  December,2019.

                                                      C.C.Case No. 51  of 2017.

Arun Kumar Rout, S/O. Laxmidhar Rout,    

At-Hatakaranda, Po-Sakuntalapur,   

Dist.- Jajpur .                                                                            …… ……....Complainant .                                                                   .                                    

                                                  (Versus)

 

1. The  Branch Manager, L & T Finance Ltd,

At. Chandikhole , P.O. Sunguda ,P.S.Badachana , Dt.Jajpur .

2. The Branch Manager,L & T Finance Ltd, 1^st floor OSL Tower-III

Plot No. 1360,Jhanjir Mangala ,P.S.Badambadi , Dt.Cuttack .

3. Regional Transport Authority ,At.Chandikhole ,P.O. Sunguda

P.S. Sunguda,P.S.Badachana , Dt.Jajpur

                                                                                                                              ……………..Opp.Parties.                                                                                                                                         

For the Complainant:                                   Sri A.K.Biswal, Sri R.L.Biswal ,Advocates .

For the Opp.Parties : no.1 and 2                  Sri B.K.Tripathy, Advocate.

For the Opp.parties : No.3                            A.G.P (P.K.Panda)     

                                                                                                     Date of order:    20 . 12. 2019.

MISS  SMITA  RAY , L A D Y  M E M B E R  .

Deficiency in finance  service is the grievance of the petitioner .

            The facts as stated by the complainant in the complaint petition shortly are  that the petitioner has purchased a vehicle bearing Regd No.OD-04-G-7215 by the financial assistance  from  the O.Ps  through  hypothecation agreement on 17.10.15 . It  is pertinent to  mention here  that though  the vehicle of the petitioner was  registered on 17.10.15  but  till date  the petitioner was  unable to ply  the vehicle on the road. That the  O.P.no.1  charged the EMI since 5.6.14 due to latches  on the part of O.P.no.3  the complainant was  not paid the EMI in time .   That in  this regard the petitioner requested  and   representation  to the O.P.no.1 seeking time for repayment of up to date EMIs. Though during his hardship he became defaulted and paid the EMIs . It is stated by the petitioner that  all on sudden on   09. 01. 15 the o.p.no.1 forcibly seized the vehicle and detained it in Santilata stock yard without giving any pre- seizure  notice to the petitioner  . Thereafter  the petitioner  deposited some amount and requested the  O.P.no.1 to take back his vehicle  but the O.P.no.1 without considering  the petitioner’s case sold the vehicle on 31.03.2015    which was came to the knowledge of the petitioner later on  . Thereafter  the petitioner requested  the O.P.no.1 to refund the rest amount  after clearance of the loan dues to him  .  That inspite of repeated request and remainder to  refund of the petitioner’s money  to which  the O.P.no.1 and 2 have  received  towards  sale proceeds  of the petitioner’s vehicle , they are sleeping over the matter  silently  till date .

Accordingly finding no other alternative the petitioner has filed the present dispute with  the prayer  to  direct  the  O.P.no. 1 and 2  to refund Rs.1,65,000/- which was deposited by the petitioner  with 12% interest  along with Rs. 1,00,000/-  for harassment and mental agony and Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expenses .

After notices O.P.no.1 and 2 appeared through their advocate and filed the written version taking the stand that the petitioner has approached the Hon’ble Forum to direct the O.P.no.1 to refund Rs.1,65,000/-  which was deposited by the petitioner with  12%  interest and Rs.1,00,000/- towards  compensation  and litigation expenses  .

2.That  the terms and  conditions of the agreement all the disputes, claims and questions which arises out of this loan Agreement  shall be settled through Arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.  

It is pertinent to mention here that  that the Arbitration  Award   has already been passed  in the above noted case  prior to filing of the present dispute  . Hence the  present  complaint petition is not entertained and liable to be dismissed  as per observation of Hon’ble National Commission  in the case of Installment Supply Ltd- Vrs. Kangra Ex-servicemen Transport Co. and another)  reported in 2007(1) CPC-p-411 ,wherein it is held that

“ The consumer complaint case is not maintainable in a case where an arbitration award has already been passed  “.

It is submitted here that as our Apex court of India in the case of Magma Leasing Finance Ltd-Vrs. Potluri Madhavilata and Others ,( 2009 (10) SCC-P-103- wherein it is held that

            “ S.8 is in the form of legislative command. Hence ,on fulfillment of conditions required for applicability of S.8 court has no option except to refer the parties to arbitration”. The same view has been also taken by our own High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of M/S Jagdish Raj & Bros- Versus- Jagdish Raj & Ors( 2003(1) CCC-P-367-Shree Ram Transport Finance –Versus-Jasbir Singh( 2009(4) RCR-P-525)

Owing to the  facts stated above the C.C.Case is  liable to be dismissed.

            On the date of hearing we heard the argument from the side  of the learned advocate of O.p.no.1 and 2 and  advocate for complaint is absent . After perusal of the record and documents it is  observed that :

It is undisputed fact that the petitioner purchased  the alleged vehicle   with financial assistance   of the o.ps -1 and 2  .

It is also undisputed fact the petitioner  became defaulter to repay the EMIs  of the alleged vehicle but after perusal of the Arbitration Award  passed by the Hon’ble   Arbitrator it is observed that the Arbitration Award has been  passed  on 27.6.16  but the present dispute has  filed on 1.9.17  Accordingly it is our considered view that the present dispute is not maintainable  before this fora as per  observation of Hon’ble National Commission ,New Delhi in case of Installment Supply Ltd- Vrs- Kangra Ex-service men Transport Co. and another  reported in 2007(1) CPC-p-411   has categorically stated that the consumer complaint  is not maintainable in case  where  Arbitration  Award  has already been passed .

Hence this Order

  In the result the   C.C.Case  is  dismissed  . No cost .

            This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 20th  day of  December,2019. under my hand and seal of the Forum.