BEFORE THE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MANGALORE

Dated this the 15^th December 2016

PRESENT

        SMT. C.V. SHOBHA             :  HONBLE PRESIDENT

        SMT.LAVANYA M. RAI        :  HONBLE MEMBER                                        

COMPLAINT NO.167/2015

        (Admitted on 02.06.2015)

Mr. Hari Prasad Shenoy,

S/o Mr. Laxaman Shenoy,

Aged about 29 years,

Residing at D.No.1.9.582.4(1),

Derebail Taluk, D.K.

                                                           ……… Complainant

(Advocate for Complainant by Sri. SKU)         

VERSUS

1. Srei Equipment Finance Limited,

H.O. Plot No. Y.10, Block EP, Sector V,

Salt Lake City,

Kolkota 700091

Represented by its Authorised Signatory

2. Srei Equipment Finance Limited,

Branch office at Mangalore,

Represented by its Authorised Signatory.

                                              …. Opposite Party

 (Opposite Party No. 1 and 2:Ex parte)

ORDER DELIVERED BY HONBLE MEMBER

SMT. LAVANYA M. RAI

1. 1. This complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act alleging deficiency in service as against the opposite party claiming certain reliefs.
2. The brief facts of the case are as under:

          That the complainant availed loan from the Opposite Party on 01.05.2011 for the tune of Rs.25,00,000/ on repayment of monthly installment of Rs.68,750/ for 34 months.  At the time of availing the loan the Opposite Party collected 36 post dated cheque for all installments.  That the Opposite Party presenting the cheque every month and credit the EMI to his loan account.  Every cheque presented by the Opposite Parties was honoured and there were no default on part of the complainant.

          The complainant cleared the entire loan on 21.03.2014.  Therefore the complainant requested the Opposite Parties to issue him a loan clearance certificate to him as he has made all the cheque should be honoured.  But the Opposite Parties going on promising issuance of the loan clearance certificate to him.  But to the surprise of the complainant, the Opposite Parties issued a demand notice dated 09.06.2014 showing pending of alleged overdue charges and charges of Rs.64,367/ on false and untenable ground.  Immediately after the receipt of the notice the complainant contact the Opposite Party No.2 regarding the clarification of charges mentioned in the demand notice.  There is no such dues from the complainant as alleged by the Opposite Party.  But Opposite Party not issue the due certificate and going on issue demand notice on after another to the complainant.  Hence the above complaint filed under section 12 of the C.P.Act 1986(here in after referred to as the Act) seeking direction from this For a to give direction to the Opposite Party to issue loan clearance certificate and to pay damages for mental agony, stress and inconvenience for Rs.1,00,000/ and also cost of the proceedings.

3. Version notice served to the Opposite Parties by RPAD.  In spite of receiving the version notice not filed version nor represented the case till this date.  Hence Opposite Parties placed exparte.
4. In support of the complainant One Mr. Hari Prasad Shenoy, (CW1) the complainant filed affidavit reiterating what has been stated in the complaint and produced the document same has marked as Ex C1 to C6.  On behalf of the opposite parties not lead any evidence hence treated nil.

In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this case are as under:

1. Whether the complainant proves that  there is a deficiency  of service on the part of the Opposite Party?
2. If so, for what relief and from whom the complainant entitled?
3. What order? 

We have considered the notes/oral arguments submitted by the learned counsel and also considered the materials that was placed before this Forum and answer the points are as follows:.

Point No. (i) to (ii): As per Affirmative

Point No. (iii): As per the final order.

REASONS

5. POINTS No. (i) to (iii):  The complainant in order to substantiate the averments made in the complaint filed affidavit supported by documents i.e. Ex.C1 to C6, Ex.C1 to C5 are the demand notice issued by Opposite Party Ex.C6 is the Account statement of the complainant from 26.04.2011 to 31.05.2014. From the above document Ex.C6 the statement Opposite Party presented the cheque on  15^th of every month same was credited to the loan account and it also reveals that there is no over dues.  Further, every month the EMI credited to the account through cheque, but Opposite Party charging overdue charges without giving notice to the complainant.  At the month of February Opposite Party presented 2 cheques without informing the complainant hence same were dishonored. Therefore committed deficiency in service.  The Opposite Party failed to present the cheques within time and made the EMI to become over dues and there by charged over dues.Further we noted that Opposite Parties inspite of receiving version notice neither appeared nor contested the case till this date.  The entire evidence placed by the complainant not contradicted nor controverted by the Opposite Party which requires no further proof.From the documentary evidence placed  by the complainant it is clear that due to the negligence and deficiency on part of the Opposite Party the complainant has made to pay the over dues and cheque bounce charges and other charges.  So the complainant is not liable to pay any charges as claimed in the demand notice. In view of the above said reasons, we hold that Opposite Parties are directed to issue loan clearance certificate to the complainant for the deficiency in service committed and also pay jointly and severally for a sum of Rs.5,000/ as damages to the complainant for the inconvenience  and mental agony and stress.  Further pay sum of Rs.5,000/ as litigation expenses.  Payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

In the result, accordingly we pass the following Order:

ORDER

The complaint allowed. The Opposite Party directed to issue loan clearance certificate to the complainant, and also to pay jointly and severally for a sum of Rs.5,000/ (Rupees five thousand only) as damages to the complainant Further to pay for a sum of Rs. 5,000/ (Rupees five thousand only) cost and litigation expenses. Payment shall be made within 30 days from the receipt of this order.In case of failure to pay the above mentioned amount within the stipulated time, the opposite parties are directed to pay interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the above said total amount from the date of compliant till the date of payment.

Copy of this order as per statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties and therefore the file shall be consigned to record room.

(1 to 5 pages dictated to the Stenographer typed by him, revised and pronounced in the open court on this the 15^th of December 2016)                               

             MEMBER                                            PRESIDENT        

(SMT. LAVANYA M.RAI)                      (SMT. C.V.SHOBHA)

D.K. District Consumer Forum                D.K. District Consumer Forum

            Mangalore.                                                Mangalore.

                                       ANNEXURE

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainant:

CW1: Mr. Hari Prasad Shenoy,

Documents marked on behalf of the Complainant:

Ex.C1: Dated: 09.06.2014: Demand Notice.

Ex.C2: Dated: 12.09.2014: Demand Notice.

Ex.C3: Dated: 24.12.2014: Demand Notice.

Ex.C4: Dated: 22.01.2015: Demand Notice.

Ex.C5: Dated: 14.11.2015: Demand notice issued by the Opposite Party.

Ex.C6: Account statement from 26.04.2011 to 31.05.2014.

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite Parties:

Nil

Documents marked on behalf of the Opposite Parties:   

Nil

Dated: 15.12.2016.                                               MEMBER