STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA NAGPUR CIRCUIT BENCH NAGPUR First Appeal No. A/20/75 ( Date of Filing :)

(Arisen out of Order Dated 02/12/2019 in Case No. RBT/CC/18/577 of District Additional DCF, Nagpur)

1. M/s. TVS Credit Services Ltd. ...........Appellant(s)

Plot No.354 A/978, Gandhi Nagar, Near LAD College, RamNagar Road, Nagpur 10 Through its authorized person Shri.Ajay S/o Ramesh Gaur, Territory Collection Manager,R/o CA Road,Nagpur

2. M/s TVS Credit Services Ltd.

Bristal IT partk, 2^nd floor, south Phase, Thiruvika Industrial Estate,Guind, Chennai,32 Both through its Authorized Person Shri.Ajay S/o Ramesh Gaur, Territory Collection Manager,R/o CA Road,Nagpur Vs.

Shri.Akshay S/o Ankush Rao Wankhede, R/o Plot No.12-B, Mahaveer Nagar, Near S.D.

Hospital, Distt.Nagpur ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MRS. KALYANI S. KAPSE PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MS. SHAILA D. WANDHARE MEMBER PRESENT: Adv.Kale present for the Appellant. Adv.Mishrikotkar is present for Respondent .

Final Order / Judgement (Dated : 22 Jan 2025)

PER MS.SHAILA D. WANDHARE MEMBER HON'BLE MEMBER

1. The appellants namely M/s. TVS Credit Services Ltd. has preferred the present appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 challenging the order passed on 02/12/2019 in Consumer Complaint No.RBT/CC/18/577 (hereinafter it is referred to in short as “impugned order”) of the learned Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nagpur(hereinafter it is referred to in short as “learned Additional District Forum”) by which the complaint filed by respondent no.1 being complainant namely Akshay Ankushrao Wankhede came to be allowed and the appellants being O.P. Nos.1 and 2 were directed to pay a sum of Rs.100/- per day from 22/02/2016 to 14/05/2016 and also to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/-for mental and physical harassment as well as Rs.5,000/- as a cost of the proceeding.

2. The parties of the appeal are hereinafter referred to by their original nomenclature as complainant and opposite parties respectively for better appreciation.

3. The facts that emerge from the original complaint is that the complainant had entered into a vehicle loan agreement No. MH3029TW11599 on 30.10.2013) with the opposite party no. 1 for the purchase of a TVS RTR Motorcycle, registration number MH-49-P-7926. The loan amount was Rs.60,000/- with monthly installments of Rs.2,342/- due from 07.12.2013 with the loan term ending on 07.11.2016. The complainant has paid a total of Rs.54,008/- which constitutes nearly 90% of the principal loan amount by October 2015. However, due to financial difficulties, the complainant could not continue making timely payments after October 2015. The complainant alleges that O.P. unlawfully seized the motorcycle on 22.02.2016, without prior notice through the use of two individuals resembling gangsters and demanded that installment worth of payments be deposited to release the vehicle. The complainant contacted the police and the motorcycle was deposited at the police station. A written complaint was lodged with the police on the same day. The complainant further issued a legal notice on 26.02.2016 to O.P. requesting the return of the loan documents and seeking compensation of Rs.50,000/- for the distress caused by the illegal actions of O.P. In response, O.P. sent a letter on 02.03.2016 demanding Rs.42,761/- within seven days threatening to auction the motorcycle. The letter mistakenly mentioned a date of 24.02.2016 which caused further confusion. The complainant contends that O.P. failed to follow the provisions of the Reserve Bank of India circulars dated 20.09.2006 and 10.10.2007, which set out guidelines for repossession of vehicles and recovery of loans. The complainant has suffered significant mental, physical, and financial hardship due to the improper and illegal actions of O.P. Consequently, the complainant seeks a compensation of Rs.50,000/- for the distress caused, along with Rs.10,000/- for the cost of filing this