Onus To Prove Deficiency Lies With Complainant: NCDRC
Live LawThe National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Dr. Inder Jit Singh, held that the onus to prove the deficiency of service against the respondent lies with the complainant. The District Forum directed the finance company to hand over the possession of the vehicle to the complainant in the same condition as it was on the date of taking forcible possession. Observations by the National Commission The National Commission observed that in the case of a complaint about the repossession of a vehicle, the complainant argued that the finance company took possession of the vehicle with the help of the police, while the finance company denied any such action. The Supreme Court in M/S Magma Fincorp Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar Tiwari emphasized that the complainant must prove deficiency, a principle reaffirmed in PSA SICAL Terminals Ltd. v. Board of Trustees of V.O.