LAWS(NCD)-2018-2-92

AMRUT PANDURANG SHINDE Vs. TATA FINANCE LIMITED

Decided On February 16, 2018
Amrut Pandurang Shinde Appellant
V/S
TATA FINANCE LIMITED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 14.06.2016 of the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai ('the State Commission') in MA/15/446 in FA no 993 of 2015.

(2.) The facts of the case as per the petitioner complainant are that the petitioner had purchased a four wheeler 'Tata Spacio Gold' from respondent no.1/ OP no. 1 by taking a loan of Rs.4,68,469/- from respondent no. 2/ OP no.2. As per the loan agreement the amount was to be paid in 48 EMIs of Rs.10,900/- each. The petitioner had alleged that he had paid the total instalments of Rs.2,48,484/-. On 14.06.2007, the vehicle was seized by respondent no. 1 on account of irregular payment without any prior notice. The respondent no. 1 sold the vehicle to a third person. Hence, the petitioner filed a consumer complaint no. 20 of 2010 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mumbai Suburban District, Mumbai ('the District Forum') with the following prayer:

(3.) The District Forum vide its order dated 06.01.2015 while dismissing the complaint observed as under: