- (1.) The appeal arises out of the order dated 03.09.09 passed by the District Forum , Uttar Dinagpur in case no 01 f 2009 wherein the complaint was allowed on contest with cost against the OP who is the Appellant herein. An award of Rs.2,56,000/- made against the OP who will in addition pay to the Complainant compensation of Rs. 10,000/- along with litigation cost of Rs. 1,000/- within one month from the date of the order failing which the Complainant would be at liberty to claim interest @ 6.5 % p.a till realization. Being aggrieved, the Appellant has preferred the instant appeal.
(2.) Briefly the facts of the case are that the Complainant/Respondent being an unemployed person purchased a Trekker on the basis of a hire purchase agreement with the OP/ Appellant. The Respondent/ Complainant purchased the vehicle at a price of Rs. 3,75,500/-out of which Rs. 96,500/- was paid by the Respondent / Petitioner and the rest amount of Rs. 2,80,000/- was financed by the Appellant/OP. The vehicle was registered with the RTO, Uttar Dinajpur who also issued a permit to ply the vehicle from Dalkhola to Islampur. 34 monthly instalments @ Rs.10,200/- were fixed out of which 25 instalments amounting to Rs. 2,56,000/- were paid. At the time of taking the loan the OP/Appellant took signatures of the Complainant in various blank papers. Initially interest was calculated @ 8.25% and again revised to 9.75%. The OP was entitled to claim Rs. 86,724/- as dues from the Complainant. The Complainant had approached the OP with the request to make a proper calculation of the balance amount to be paid but no positive response was available. Ultimately on 25.12.04 the OP/Appellant took possession of the vehicle forcibly and dishonestly from the route and kept it at the premises of Joyguru Automobiles, Durgapur Rajbari under P.S. Raigung. The Respondent/ Petitioner approached the OP to recover the vehicle but he was refused. The Complainant also approached the Police administration to recover the vehicle but in vain. He then filed a writ petition before the Hon ble Kolkata High Court, vide WPNo 5528(W) of 2005 on 5.9.08. The writ petition was dismissed with liberty to apply before the appropriate Forum for appropriate order. He came to learn that the vehicle in question had already been sold out by the OP illegally to another party. Hence, the case for direction on the OP to pay a sum of Rs. 2,56,000/- with interest along with compensation.
(3.) The OP/Appellant (Mahendra & Mahendra Financial Services Ltd) contested the case by filing written version. It was stated therein that the Complainant was directed by the Hon ble High Court to deposit Rs. 1 lakh in favour of the OP/Appellant. The Respondent /Complainant, as alleged did not comply with the order. In their additional written version the OP further contended that the subject vehicle was purchased by the Complainant for commercial purpose and as such it was beyond the jurisdiction of the District Forum.;