Shyambahadursingh Gangasingh Rajput vs Mahindra And Mahindra Financial Services Ltd.

COMPLAINANT Shyambahadursingh Gangasingh Rajput had filed consumer complaint No.246 of 2009 before Valsad District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. The matter pertains to a mini truck which was purchased by the Complainant in 2006 with loan of Rs.3.05 lacs taken from M/s. Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Ltd. Under this agreement, the Complainant was required to repay the loan in 55 monthly instalments of Rs.7700/ -.

AS per record, the Complainant consistently defaulted on repayment of monthly instalments. Due to this the OP repossess the vehicle on 1.9.2008. It was released to him a few days later on the assurance to pay the outstanding instalments. The case of the Complainant was that the vehicle was forcibly repossessed again on 8.9.2009. He claimed to have already repaid a sum of Rs.2.69 lacs yet, the vehicle was not returned. Per contra, the case of the OP/Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Ltd. was that the vehicle was repossessed on 7.9.2009 as the outstanding loan amount was Rs.2,64,323/ -. On 17.9.2009 a letter was also sent to him to repay the outstanding amount.

THE District Forum held that the Complainant was himself responsible for his predicament and the complaint was devoid of any merit. The appeal against this order was dismissed by the Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, holding that the due process had been followed in repossession of the vehicle. Therefore, there was no deficiency on the part of the financier. Consequently, the State Commission upheld the order of the District Forum.

WE have heard the Complainant in person and carefully perused the records submitted by him. The main contention of the revision petitioner/ Complainant is that the truck in question had been seized by the Forest department on 26.1.2009 and was released after six months on 27.7.2009. As there was no income generation from the vehicle in this period, he had defaulted in payment of a few instalments. Mr. Rajan Singh, Advocate submitted on behalf of the respondent/OP that the Complainant had paid 26 EMIs before his vehicle was seized by the Forest department. After this seizure, the monthly instalments stopped coming. At the time of repossession of this vehicle on 9.9.2009 balance of Rs.2,22,200/ - had remained outstanding in the loan account. The vehicle was eventually sold by the financier on 6.9.2011for a sum of Rs.2,35,000/ - and the amount was adjusted to his loan account. We have also perused the relevant documents in this behalf. Apparently, with the receipt of the sale proceeds the entire balance outstanding as on 9.9.2009 stood recovered.

IT is clear from the records that the revision petitioner had a period of two years available to him to clear the outstanding instalments of the loan and to reclaim the vehicle from OPs. But he failed to do so. In this background, we find no merit in this revision petition. The same is dismissed and the decision of the fora below confirmed. No order as to costs.