Consumer complaints are maintainable even in the presence of arbitration clauses, affirming consumers' rights under the Act for effective redressal.

1. This Appeal at the instance of the Appellant / OP No. 1 (Indusind Bank Limited) is directed against the order dated 24 August, 2017 passed by the learned DCDR Forum, th Bhirbhum at Suri in connection with Complaint Case No. 135/2014. The principal Respondent No. 1 of this Appeal was the Complainant and the present Appellant and proforma Respondent were respectively the Opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 of that Complaint Case.

2. The principal Respondent No. 1 as Complainant instituted a Complaint Case being CC / 135/2014 under S.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum at Suri, Bhirbhum praying for certain relief / reliefs as sought for in the prayer portion of the complaint. It has been contended in the Memorandum of Appeal that the Respondent No. 1 / Complainant had taken a loan for purchasing a dumper being No. WB 53A 1291 with the financial assistance of the Appellant (Bank) in terms of loan agreement dated 12.5.2012 vide agreement No. WAS00050D and the said vehicle was covered with insurance policy with proforma Respondent No. 2 / Opposite Party No. 2 viz. Cholamandalam, M/s. General Insurance Limited bearing policy No. 3379/00758417/000/000 with a sum assured of Rs. 12,60,000 (Twelve lakh sixty thousand). It has been also contended that the Complainant’s said vehicle in question was stolen away on 2 nd December, 2012 and the Complainant lodged a claim for insurance before the proforma Respondent / Opposite Party No. 2 (Insurance Company). Finally, the Opposite Party No. 2 (Insurance Company) settled the said claim of the Complainant with Rs. 12,58,500 and paid Rs. 9,45,000 on 23 rd March, 2013 and Rs. 3,13,500 on 30 th October, 2014 to the Appellant (Bank) by two instalments. The Respondent No. 1 / Complainant prayed for refunding the surplus amount after adjustment of the said loan amount. The Appellant (Bank) contested the Complaint Case by filing Written Version. Denying all the material allegations as leveled in the body of the complaint the Appellant / OP No. 1(Bank) raised the question of maintainability for want of jurisdiction and arbitration clause embodied in the loan agreement.

3. Upon hearing the respective parties and after considering the materials, facts and evidence on record the Ld. Forum below passed its final order / judgment on 24.8.2017 in CC No. 135/2014 wherein and whereby Ld. Forum below directed the present Appellant Indusind Bank Ltd. to pay a sum of Rs. 5,09,390+ interest @ 8% per annum on Rs. 1,85,900 since March 23, 2013 to October 29, 2014 and @ 8% per annum on Rs. 5,09,390 since October 29, 2014 till realization of the amount to the Complainant along with cost of Rs. 2,000.

4. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned order / judgment passed by the Ld. Forum below in CC No. 135/2014 the Opposite Party No. 1 as Appellant has preferred this Appeal on the grounds that the Ld. District Forum failed to appreciate that the Complaint was not at all maintainable in law and fact; that the Ld. Forum below also failed to appreciate that the Respondent No. 1 / Complainant is not a consumer within the meaning of the provision of the said Act; that the Ld. Forum below failed to observe that the present dispute has arisen out of a contract and as such the dispute is purely contractual in nature; that the Ld. District Forum below also failed to appreciate that the Respondent No. 1 / Complainant did not avail any service in any manner whatsoever from the Appellant (Bank) and as such the dispute in question does not fall within the