SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

B.N.P.SINGH, P.D.SHENOY
Capital Trust Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Sanjay Dutt – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Ms. Binasha Soni, Advocate.

ORDER

P.D. Shenoy, Member—Factual matrix of this case in brief are that a T.V.S Motorcycle was purchased by the complainant, Shri Sanjay Dutt on hire-purchase basis by availing finance from M/s Capital Trust Ltd. At the time of delivery, the complainant paid margin money of Rs.18,438 against Rs. 43,435 price of the vehicle. The balance was to be paid in equal monthly installments. It is the case of the complainant that he had paid Rs.33,920 till July 2005. Subsequently, the hire-purchaser forcibly took possession of the vehicle and sold the same, forcing the consumer to file a complaint before the District Forum.

2. The financer contended that the cost of the vehicle is Rs. 43,435 against which the amount financed was Rs. 30,000 and amount paid was Rs. 18,435. The hire-purchaser submitted before the District Forum that as the complainant had not paid the amount, he was served with the notice. However, they denied that any force was used.

3. District Forum disbelieved the contention of the respondent that no force was used and directed the opposite parties, the trader and financer to pay to the complainant the admitted amount of Rs. 33,920 paid by complainant himself in addition to



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top