INDUSIND BANK LTD. & ANR. Vs. SIMARJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These revision petitions have been filed under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, challenging the legality and correctness of the order dated 16.12.2009, passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as "the State Commission") in First Appeal no. 11/2009, Simarjit Singh vs. IndusInd Bank Ltd., vide which, while allowing the appeal, the order dated 04.12.2008, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sangrur, Punjab in by the complainant Simarjit Singh, dismissing the said complaint, was set aside and the consumer complaint was allowed.

(2.) The facts of the case are that as per the version given in the by Simarjit Singh, he purchased a Ashok Leyland 4018 Tuskar Turbo Tractor 130WB, bearing registration no. PB13Q 8731 in July, 2006 from the dealer, Sidh Motors Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana for a consideration of Rs. 13,50,000/- after raising finance from the opposite party (OP) IndusInd Bank Ltd. According to the complainant, he defaulted in the repayment of three instalments of the loan amount, but after receipt of notice dated 12.03.2008 from the OP Bank, he paid an amount of Rs. 1,75,350/- to the Bank on various dates i.e. on 24.03.2008, 06.05.2008 and 31.05.2008. As per the complainant, the total amount payable to the Bank by June, 2008 was Rs. 8,08,800/-, against which he had paid an amount of Rs. 8,19,380/- to the OP Bank, meaning thereby that the amount paid by him was more than the amount payable by that time.

(3.) It has been alleged in the consumer complaint that when the said vehicle loaded with timber, costing about Rs. 20 lakhs, was being driven from Gandhi Dham (Gujarat) to Srinagar (JAndK), it had to stay at village Bhasaur, District Sangrur, Punjab (to which the complainant belongs) due to the strike of the truck-owners on 03.07.2008. The vehicle started its journey to Srinagar on 04.07.2008; however some 10 to 12 persons belonging to the OP Bank took forcible possession of the vehicle alongwith timber, due to which, the consignment could not be delivered to the customer to Srinagar, causing financial loss to the complainant. The OP Bank sent letter dated 09.07.2008 to the complainant, demanding certain amount from them. Despite making personal visits to the office of the opposite party, the matter was not settled and the vehicle was not released.