STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

Date of institution : 30.09.2021 Reserved On : 05.05.2022 Date of decision : 17.05.2022

1. Magma Fincorp Limited (now known as Poonawalla Fincorp Ltd.), Registered Office 24, Park Street, Kolkatta, through its Authorized Signatory PIN No.700016.

2. Magma Fincorp Limited (now known as Poonawalla Fincorp Ltd.), Moga Tyre House, near Akalsar Chowk, G.T. Road, Moga, through its Authorized Signatory PIN No.142001.

3. Magma Fincorp Limited (now known as Poonawalla Fincorp nd Ltd.), Room No.213-214, 2 Floor, Savitri Complex, Dhole Wala Chowk, G.T. Road, Ludhiana, through its Authorized Signatory PIN No.141001.

….Appellants/Opposite Parties Versus Manjit Singh, aged 58 years, son of Avtar Singh, resident of Village Rukna Beggu, Tehsil and District Ferozepur, Mobile No.9781080940.

….Respondent/Complainant First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 03.08.2021 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ferozepur.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.

1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No

3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No Present:-

For the appellants : Sh. Sethi Kumar, Advocate for Sh. Sandeep Suri, Advocate For the respondent : Sh. P.S. Chahal, Advocate.

JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY, PRESIDENT Appellants/opposite parties have approached this Commission by way of filing the present appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 to challenge the impugned order dated 03.08.2021 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ferozepur (in short, “the District Commission”), whereby the complaint filed by respondent No.1/complainant-Manjit Singh was allowed and a direction was issued to the appellants/opposite parties to issue ‘No Objection Certificate’ of the vehicle in dispute to the respondent/complainant. Said order was to be complied with within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

2. It would be apposite to mention here that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out in the complaint are that the respondent/complainant-Manjit Singh being the owner of truck Make Tata Motors bearing Registration No.PB-05W-9491 got the same financed from the appellants/opposite parties and was paying monthly instalments of loan. At the time of sanctioning of the loan, the appellants/opposite parties gave assurance that on paying the entire amount of loan instalments, the ‘No Objection Certificate’ (NOC) of the vehicle in dispute was to be issued. It was further mentioned in the complaint that the total loan amount was paid to the appellants/opposite parties but still NOC was not issued. In-spite of making requests, the matter was put off on one excuse or the other. The complainant also served a legal notice upon the opposite parties on 07.10.2020 but still nothing was done. Certain allegations of ‘deficiency in service’ and ‘unfair trade practice’ were levelled in the complaint. The prayer in the complaint was to direct the opposite parties to issue ‘No Objection Certificate’ of the vehicle and to pay an amount of ₹1 lac as compensation for causing mental agony, pain and harassment and also to pay an amount of ₹11,000/- as litigation expenses.

4. The complaint filed by the complainant was contested by the opposite parties and they filed joint reply to the complaint, wherein certain preliminary objections were also raised. It was also mentioned in the reply that the loan amount was disbursed to the complainant by opposite party No.2. The payment of loan amount was directly given to the dealer of the vehicle and thereafter, the vehicle was delivered to the complainant by the dealer. It was also mentioned in the reply that th