IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANNUR

Present: Sri.K.Gopalan:  President

Smt.K.P.Prethakumari:  Member

Smt.M.D.Jessy:               Member

                                                  Dated this, the  25^th day of  September 2009

C.C.No143/2009

K.Geetha,Thaivalappil House,

P.O.Azhikode South,                                                    Complainant

Kannur.

1. M/s.TataM otor5s Finance Ltd,

  4^th floor,

  DGP House, Old Prabhadevi Road,                            opposite parties

  Prabhadevi, Mumbai.

2. Tata Motor Finance,

  Opp.Ramananda Oil Mill,

  South Bazar, Kannur 2.

O R D E R

Smt.M.D.Jessy, Member

            This is a complaint filed under  section 12 of the consumer protection act for an order directing the opposite parties to issue Hire Purchase termination letter and to refund Rs.2300/- together with Rs.20,000/- as damages and Rs.2000/- as cost of this proceedings.

            The case of the complainant is that the complainant had availed a hire purchase loan of Rs.3 lakhs from the opposite party for the purchase of a motor vehicle bearing No.KL.13G.5978. Further the complainant has to pay Rs.32, 000/- towards insurance for the vehicle for two years and Rs.76, 500/- as finance charge to the 1^st opposite party. As such the complainant has to pay a total amount of Rs.4, 08,500/- to the 1^st opposite party. Towards the repayment of the said amount, the complainant handed over 35 post dated blank cheques to the 1^st opposite party. The 1st opposite party encashed the cheques on respective due dates which started from 9.8.04 and ended on5.6.07. All the cheques were honored except three cheques. But the amount due on the bounced chques with penal charges and bouncing charges were duly paid by the complainant to the 1^st opposite party. It was agreed between the complainant and 1^st opposite party that as soon as the loan amount is paid as per schedule the Hire Purchase termination letter to cancel the endorsement in the RC book of the vehicle would be issued by the 1^st opposite party to the complainant. But even after the receipt of the entire loan amount, the 1^st opposite party sent a notice dt.24.1.08 to the complainant demanding to pay a further amount of rs.2240/-. The complainant further submitted that though she was not liable to pay the said amount. In order to avoid a dispute she paid an amount of Rs.2300/- on 4.2.08 to the 1^st opposite party as per receipt No.304913030. Even after that the 1^st opposite party sent further letters to the complainant demanding various amounts claiming it as due. The complainant submitted that she is not liable to pay any such amount and the 1^st opposite party has duty bound to issue the Hire purchase termination letters and to return back the remaining cheques with them. Even though the complainant had deposited sufficient amount in the bank account to honour the cheques monthly, the opposite party used to present single cheque for the amount due on two or three months together. Hence even after payment of the entire loan amount some cheques are still in the custody of the opposite party as unused. The act of non-issuance of Hire Purchase termination letters to the complainant is deficiency of service on the part of 1^st opposite party. Due to the callous and negligent act of 1^st opposite party the complainant suffered great mental agony. The complainant claims an amount of Rs.20, 000/- as damages, cost and compensation.

            On getting the complaint notices issued to opposite parties but they have-not cared to appear or to file version. Subsequently both of them were called absent and set exparte.

            On the above pleadings the following issues were raised for consideration.

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?

2. Whether the opposite parties are liable to issue Hire Purchase termination letter of the vehicle having Reg.No.KL.13G.5978 to the complainant?

3. Whether the complainant is entitled to refund Rs.2300/- which she had paid on

  4.2.08 as per receipt No.304913030 to the 1^st opposite party?

4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any damage as alleged, If so what is  

    the quantum?

The evidence consists of the chief affidavit filed by complaint and Exts.A1 to A6.

Issue Nos. 1 and 2

            The complainant filed chief affidavit in tune with the complaint. It is her case that she is liable to pay Rs.4, 08,500/- under the hire purchase agreement. Towards the repayment of the said amount in monthly installments 35 signed blank cheques were issued by the complainant to 1^st opposite party. The period of loan was over on 5.6.07. Except 3 cheques all other cheques were duly honoured. The amount covered by the dishonored cheque together with the penal charge and bouncing charge was also duly paid by the complainant.

            Since the complainant had remitted all the installments of the loan amount, it is the duty of the 1^st opposite party to issue the Hire purchase termination letter to the complainant for canceling the endorsement made in the RC book of the complainant’s vehicle. Complainant alleges that for the issuance of the Hire purchase termination letter opposite party further demanded Rs.2240/- by the letter dt.24.1.08. The complainant submitted that in order to avoid a dispute she paid an amount of Rs. 2300/- on 4.2.08. Ext.A4 receipt proves that complainant has remitted the amount. But complainant alleges that even after payment of the amount as per  Ext.A4 the 1^st opposite party demanded further amount for issuing Hire purchase termination letter.

            It is clear from Ext.A3 notice issued by1st opposite party to the complainant, they are demanding Rs.2, 214/- as the balance due till 31.1.08. It is also seen mentioned in the notice that the complainant has to pay the expenses, additional finance charges and for closure charges to the 1^st opposite party. But no amount was seen calculated towards the same. After payment of the amount covered byExt.A4 receipts the complainant issued Ext.A5 lawyer notice to the opposite parties demanding to issue the H.P termination letter. The said notice is seen received by the 2^nd opposite party on 16.10.08 by Ext.A6. But the opposite parties not even cared to send a reply for the same. The Hire purchase termination letter is also not issued to the complainant.

            In the light of the available evidence on record it can be seen that the complainant has paid entire amount liable to pay. But opposite party did not issue the termination letter. Opposite parties are liable to issue Hire purchase termination letter Hence there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. The issue No.1 and 2 found in favour of complainant.

Issue No.3

            Complainant submitted that she had remitted Rs.2300/- as per Ext.A4 receipt in order to avoid a dispute. It is seen that the complainant remit the  said amount without any objection and in tune with the Ext.A3 lawyer notice issued  by 1^st opposite party. Complainant has not adduced evidence to prove that the amount in ext.A4 is over and above the liability. Hence it is difficult to direct 1`st opposite party to refund the said amount. Issue No.3 is found against complainant.

IssueNo.4

            The complainant has not adduced evidence to show what all damages she has suffered due to non issuance of Hire purchase termination letter. It is understandable that in the usual course there is some difficulty and mental agony under such   circumstances. In consideration of the practical difficulties and mental agony that the complainant has suffered we are of opinion that complainant is entitled to get a sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation and Rs.1000/- as cost of these proceedings. Thus issue No.4 is found in favour of the complainant.

            In the result, the complaint is allowed directing  the1st opposite party to issue the Hire purchase termination letter of the vehicle bearing Reg. No.KL.13.59768 and to pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation together with Rs.1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost of this proceedings to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant is allowed to execute the order against the opposite parties under the provisions of consumer protection Act.

                                    Sd/-                        Sd/-                             Sd/-

President                      Member                       Member

APPENDIX

Exhibits for the complainant

A1 & A2..Bank statements issued by canara Bank, Kannur

A3.Copy of the letter dt.24/1/08 sent by Adv.L.Vetri Chelvan

A4.Copy of the Receipt  for Rs.2,300/-

A5& A6..Copy of the lawyer notice sent to OP and Postal AD

Exhibits for the opposite parties: Nil

Witness examined for either side: Nil

                                                /forwarded by order/

                                                Senior Superintendent

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur