State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Collection Manager, Icici Bank ... vs Mrs. Surala Chakraborty, Asansol, ... on 6 June, 2012
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
State Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission
West
Bengal
BHABANI BHAVAN (GROUND FLOOR)
31, BELVEDERE
ROAD, ALIPORE
KOLKATA 700 027
S.C. CASE NO.FA/271/2011
(Arising out of order dated 29/04/2011
in CC Case No.94 of 2007 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Burdwan)
DATE OF
FILING:10/06/11 DATE OF FINAL ORDER:06/06/12
APPELLANTS :
1) The Collection
Manager
ICICI Bank Ltd.
Harekrishna Sarani,
Bengal Shrishti
B-307, B-Block, 2nd Floor
City Centre, Durgapur-713 216
2)
ICICI Bank Ltd.
3A,
Gurusaday Road
P.S.Karya,
Kolkata-700 019
3)
ICICI Bank Ltd.
11
floor, Sakar-1
Nehru Bridge Corner
Ahmadabad
RESPONDENT :
Mrs. Surala Chakraborty
W/o-Sri Suprakash Chakrahborty
Vivekananda Pally, West Ismile
P.O.Asansol, P.S.Hirapur
Dist.Burdwan
BEFORE : HONBLE
JUSTICE : Sri Kalidas Mukherjee
President
HONBLE
MEMBER : Sri
S. Coari
HONBLE
MEMBER : Smt.
M. Roy
FOR THE APPELLANTS :
Mr.
Prasanta Banerjee
Ld.
Advocate
Soni
Ojha
Ld.
Advocate
FOR THE RESPONDENT : Mr.
Mrinmoy Sinha
Ld.
Advocate
: O R D E R :
No.5/29.05.2012 HONBLE JUSTICE SRI KALIDAS MUKHERJEE, PRESIDENT This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Learned District Forum, Burdwan in case no.94 of 2007 allowing the complaint directing the OP to refund the amount already paid by the petitioner, that is, [Rs.1,71,000/- (down payment) + Rs.1,70,100/- (as monthly instalment)] = Rs.3,41,100/- together with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of payment of the loan amount to the date of making refund of Rs.3,41,100/- in full with further direction that the OP bank will pay Rs.1,000/- as litigation cost to the petitioner and Rs.10,000/- as compensation for harassment, mental agony and pecuniary loss of the petitioner.
The case of the complainant/respondent, in short, is that he applied for a loan of Rs.5,60,000/- to the OP No.1 on 31/03/05 for purchase of vehicle. The loan was sanctioned on 31/03/05 which was to be repaid by 46 monthly instalments.
The agreement was executed.
Instalments were paid by the petitioner from 01/05/05 to 01/04/06 @ Rs.14,175/-. Due to illness the petitioner could not deposit the instalments for the month of May and June, 2006 within time. A letter dated 30/06/06 demanding instalment amounting to Rs.28,350/-, but not specifically mentioning the month of default was issued by Sri Ashok Majumder, Advocate. The said notice was posted by Mr. Ashok Majumder on 13/07/06 as it is evident from the envelope of the said notice and thereafter on 19/07/06 the complainant received the said notice and in the mean time the OP Bank took repossession of the vehicle by using or engaging hooligans by force on 05/07/06. The husband of the complainant had no knowledge about the facts of the case, but unfortunately under compulsion signed on the document on 08/07/06. There was unfair trade practice by the Bank authority and the complainant requested several times the Manager (loan), ICICI Bank for the release of the said vehicle, repossession of which was forcibly taken by some persons acting as agents of the Bank. The OP Bank took repossession of the vehicle on 05/07/06 demanding Rs.4,79,712.95/-.
The petitioner suffered a loss of Rs.3,60,000/-. For the said reasons, the complaint was filed before the Learned District Forum.
The Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the respondent took loan for the purchase of the vehicle, but defaulted in payment of EMI; the bank issued notice dated 30/06/06 and repossessed the vehicle on 05/07/06. It is submitted that before sale, notice was sent to the respondent/complainant on July 25, 2006 and there was no forcible repossession.
It is submitted that there was deficiency in service. The Learned Counsel has referred to the decisions reported in 2012 (1) CPR 197 (NC) [Mahindra & Mahindra Finance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sankatha Prasad & Ors.]; 2010 CPR 365 (NC) [Parameswari Vs. The General Manager & Ors.].
The Learned Counsel for the respondent submits that the complainant failed to pay two instalments due to illness; three days notice dated 30/06/06 was sent to the complainant and it was posted on 13/07/06 which was served upon him on 19/07/06. It is submitted that the vehicle was repossessed forcibly on 05/07/06 and the signature of the husband of the complainant was obtained on the relevant paper regarding repossession on 08/07/06. The Learned Counsel for the respondent has referred to the decision reported in (2007)2 C Cr LR (SC) 317 [ICICI Bank Ltd. vs. Prakash Kaur].
We have heard the submission made by the Learned Counsel appearing for the parties. It is true that in case of default in making repayment the financier has the right to repossess the vehicle. But such repossession cannot be made by forcible means without taking recourse to the procedure established by law. It is the contention of the appellant that the repossession of the vehicle was taken on 05/07/06 and the prior notice was sent on 30/06/06. On this point the Learned Counsel for the respondent/complainant has submitted the xerox copy of the registered envelope which was sent to him bearing no. 1249/13/07. The Learned Counsel for the appellant could not show any document wherefrom it can be seen that before taking repossession the notice was served upon complainant.
The vehicle was repossessed on 05/07/06. The Bank authority took the signature of the husband on 08/07/06, although in the relevant column the date of repossession was mentioned as on 05/07/06. All the circumstances as discussed above clearly indicate that no prior notice was served upon the complainant before taking repossession and sale of the vehicle.
We have gone through the impugned judgment passed by the Learned District Forum. The vehicle was sold at Rs.3,42,000/- on 28/11/06. We find that there is no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment passed by the Learned District Forum.
In the result, the appeal fails and the same stands dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
MEMBER(SC) MEMBER(L) PRESIDENT