SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE PVT. LTD. Vs. S. NATRAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 1.4.2011 passed by the Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 589/2008 Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd.& Ors. Vs. S. Natarajan by which, while allowing appeal partly, order of District Forum allowing complaint was modified.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that complainant/respondent purchased a brand new Tata Hitachi Excavator equipment from the opposite parties/Petitioner for Rs.19,00,000/- by paying Rs.1,00,000/- as margin money to the 1st opposite party/Petitioner No.1 by obtaining finance from opposite parties 1 to 3 and on 12.3.04 again paid a margin money of Rs.2,00,000/- and an advance amount of Rs.66,665/- to the 1st opposite party and the 1st opposite party obtained many signatures on blank papers, 36 cheques, and also received securities on the immovable properties. The 1st opposite party does not give statement of accounts or repayment schedule or terms and conditions of loan to the complainant which are violation of law and deficiency of service. The complainant paid around Rs.10,00,000/- towards loan and on 16.6.05 also he paid Rs.66,665/- towards the due to the 1st opposite party. But within 3 days the equipment was taken away in an unlawful manner by "Reliance recovery team". Alleging deficiency on the part of OPs, complainant filed complaint before District Forum. OP resisted complaint denying allegations of the complaint and alleged that issues involved are purely contractual nature under arbitration agreement dated 12.3.04 entered in to between the parties and the District Forum has no jurisdiction and the complainant is not a consumer and the right to seize the equipment derived from the agreement entered into between the parties and the complainant was habitual defaulter and the cheques issued by him for the discharge of the monthly liability were dishonored for want of funds. After due warning the vehicle was taken by the opposite party. The complainant yet to pay a sum of Rs.18,17,336/-. Denying any deficiency on their part, prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District forum after hearing both the parties allowed complaint and directed OPs to pay Rs. 7 lakhs with 9% p.a. interest and further to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- and cost of Rs.5,000/-. Appeal filed by OPs was partly allowed by learned State Commission vide impugned order and order allowing compensation was set aside against which, this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused record.