Back
D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, SANJIV KHANNA
Indusind Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
Simarjit Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
In July 2006, the respondent-complainant, Simarjit Singh had availed a loan of Rs. 13,50,000/- from the appellant, IndusInd Bank Limited for financing a truck. The loan was repayable in equal monthly instalments of Rs. 35,150/-. The respondent committed default in payment of three instalments due in October 2007, November 2007 and February 2008. Consequently, the Bank had issued demand notice dated 12th March 2008 for payment of Rs. 1,39,335/-. Thereupon, it is accepted, the respondent had paid Rs. 1,04,200/- on 24th March 2008, Rs. 35,150/- on 6th May 2008 and Rs. 36,000/- on 31st May 2008. Accordingly, Rs. 8,19,300/- was paid by 31st May 2008, while as per the instalment schedule, the respondent was required to pay only Rs. 8,08,000/- up to June 2008.
2. Despite the respondent not being in arrears, the truck of the respondent with loaded cargo of timber, going from Gandhi Dham, Gujarat to Srinagar was stopped near village Bhasaur by about 10- 12 persons on 3rd July 2008. They then forcibly took physical possession of the truck and the timber.
3. Thereupon, the respondent preferred Consumer Complaint No. 344 of 2008 alleging deficiency in service before th
Valuation of consignment must be based upon documentary evidence and not on mere conjectures and surmises.
Vehicle’s possession taken by financer forcibly and in absence of any prior notice to the Respondent, it comes under unfair trade practice.
Goods damaged in short circuit due to fire – Liability of DTDC will extend to its destination place.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
