- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 10.03.08, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short), in complaint case No.26/ 06, whereby the complaint of the appellant herein, in respect of compensation of Rs.2,50,000/ - on account of forceful repossession of financed vehicle, has been dismissed, holding that there was no deficiency in service.
(2.) FACTS of the case are that the appellant herein is registered owner of Tata Truck bearing registration No.CG -15 -A -4085. The truck was purchased with the help of finance provided by respondent No.3, from respondent No.l. Installments were being paid and on 02.09.05 also Rs. 10,000/ - was paid Remaining amount was to be paid in installments. It is alleged in the complaint that agreement executed between the parties was in English and was not explained to him. No opportunity was provided by respondent Nos.land 3 for payment of remaining installments of the loan amount and the vehicle was repossessed without any pro -intimation and was sold. Then, the complaint was filed before the District Forum alleging deficiency in service against the respondents, with the version that the complainant already spent Rs.l,18,775/ -on repairs of the vehicle and as no opportunity was granted for payment of remaining installments, and the vehicle was forcefully repossessed, so it was deficiency in service.
(3.) IN reply, it has been averred by respondent No.l that there were defaults in payment of installments and apart from initial payment of Rs. 10,000/ -, at the time of taking possession of the vehicle, nothing was paid. Then a notice was issued to the complainant. He had also written letters to respondents, seeking some more time for payment of installments, but when ultimately nothing was paid then the vehicle was repossessed as per terms of the agreement, executed between the parties and in doing so, no deficiency in service was committed by respondents. It has also been averred that the vehicle was sold for Rs.5,00,000/ -and the amount was adjusted against the loan account of the complainant and after this adjustment Rs.1,18,000/ - were outstanding in the loan account. Thus, there was no deficit acy in service. Learned District Forum after taking into consideration terms of the agreement entered between the parties, has found that as the installments were not paid in time, so respondents were entitled to repossess the vehicle and to sale it and there was no deficiency in service, in doing so. On the basis of this finding, the complaint was dismissed.;