IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTESREDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution: 09.02.2017 Date of Hearing: 28.11.2025 Date of Decision: 16.01.2026 FIRST APPEAL NO.- 73/2017 IN THE MATTER OF FULLERTON INDIA CREDIT COMPANY LTD., THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER: VIPIN SHARMA, 3^RD FLOOR, 1-B, PUSA ROAD, OLD RAJENDER NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110060.

(Through: Sagar & Sagar Law Offices)

…Appellant VERSUS MR. RAVINDER KUMAR, S/O SH. DHEERAJ SINGH, R/O: H.NO. B-16, STREET NO-2, EAST NATHU COLONY, SHAHDARA, DELHI-110093.

(Through: Mr. Amit Kain, Advocate)

…Respondent CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS. BIMLA KUMARI, MEMBER (FEMALE)

Present: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Counsel for the Appellant.

Respondent in person.

PER: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, PRESIDENT JUDGMENT

1. The facts of the case as per the District Commission record are as under:

“As per complaint the complainant has borrowed a loan from OP in the Month of August 2010 for a sum of Rs. 38,550/- payable in 24 EMIs of Rs. 2040/-, against purchase of motor bike, make Hero Honda CBZ bearing registration No DL-15T 8886. OP sanctioned the loan vide, Loan A/c No. 011920200011870 and Customer ID. No. 2517492. Against repayment of loan complainant has issued 24 post dated cheques of EMIs of Rs. 2040/- each in favour of OP. All cheques except one for the month of March 2011 has got encashed by OP from the account of complainant. The complainant has paid the said installment (March 2011) in cash to the representative of OP against due receipt vide No. 4411243 dated 29.03.2011 amounting to Rs. 2,040/-However, said cheque has since not been returned by OP to complainant and is still in the custody of OP. After complete repayment of the loan, complainant's request for issuing No Objection Certificate (NOC) was not paid heed to by the OP. Rather OP telephonically informed, in the month of March 2013, to the complainant, that he has to pay penalty of Rs 5,000/- alongwith one installment for the month of December 2011 as cheque for this month was dishonoured. Complainant informed that the said cheque has already been encashed out of his account but OP did not accept the same and insisted that the same is still pending and not cleared till date. Complainant visited to the office of OP and contacted its officials a number of times, particularly on 01.08.2013, 22.08.2013 and latest on 05.12.2013 but there is no satisfactory reply from the side of OP. Thus, OP is deficient in service and harassing complainant, leading to mental agony, pain and waste of his precious time Complainant has prayed for the directions to the OP to issue NOC and remove hypothecation from the RC of the vehicle in question alongwith Rs. 50,000/- compensation and litigation cost of Rs. 11,000/-.

2. OP, by filing its reply, has alleged that since a cheque of December 2011 has been dishonored and the same has yet not been paid, complainant is defaulter of that installment and liable to pay penal interest and penalty thereon, which he has failed to pay. Therefore, no cause of action against OP arises to issue NOC unless the defaulted installment is paid with interest and penalty. OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

2. The District Commission after taking into consideration the material available on record passed the order dated 07.08.2016, whereby it held as under:

“5. In support of his contentions complainant has placed on record loan repayment schedule (Ex CW1/A), Copy of Bank Passbook (Ex CW1/B), Copy of Receipt dated 29.03.2011 of Rs. 2040/- issued by OP (Ex CW1/C), Copy of statement of cleared cheque dated 08.12.2011 (Ex CW1/D), Copy of application for issuing No Objection Certificate (Ex CW1/E), Copy of FIR dated

04.03.2014 (Ex CW1/F).

6. OP in support of its contention has placed on record only summary of, complainant's account including dishonor of cheque.

7. Regarding payment of cheque of March 2011 OP has no dispute. Ex-CW1/C receipt issued on behalf of OP for the amount of that installment has