KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL NO.312/10

JUDGMENT DATED 4.2.2011

PRESENT

SMT.VALSALA SARANGADHARAN               -- MEMBER

SHRI.S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR                    --  MEMBER

1.      Kabeer

C.K.Auto, Consultant and Finance Agent,

N.V.Complex, Mukkam Road,

Areacode.

2.      Sharmila Finance,                                     --  APPELLANTS

No.310 Arcot Road,

Kodambakkam, Chennai - 600024,

Reptd. by their Power of attorney holder,

Kabeer, C.K.Auto

Consultant and Finance Agent,

N.V.Complex, Mukkam Road,

Areacode.

            (By Adv.R.Narayan)

                             Vs.

1.      T.Abdu Samad,           

          S/0 Muhammed, Thottiyil House,

          Kadappadi, Peruvallur Post,                    --  RESPONDENTS

          Kondotty via, Malappuram District,

          Kerala.

2.      The Regional Transport Officer,

          RTO, Malappuram.

JUDGMENT

SHRI.S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR,MEMBER

          This appeal is preferred by the first and second opposite parties in CC.94/09 of CDRF, Malappuram.  By the impugned order the second  opposite  party  is  under  directions   to  issue the        higher

purchase termination letter, confirmation letter and no objection certificate to the complainant in respect of vehicle KL-1-B-9019 within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order failing which     the third opposite party is directed  to cancel the hire purchase endorsement in respect of the vehicle KL-1-B-9019.

          2. The case of the complainant before the Forum below is that he has availed a loan for  Rs.60,000/- from the second opposite party through the first opposite party and that the opposite parties directed him to repay   the loan  at the rate of 4,100/-  per month and the complainant had remitted the whole amount and the opposite parties refused to issue  higher purchase termination letter and no objection certificate.   Alleging deficiency in service, the complaint was filed praying for directions to the opposite parties to terminate the hire purchase agreement and to issue no objection certificate by the opposite parties along with compensation and costs.

          3. The first and second opposite parties resisted the complaint by filing version wherein it was contended that though the complainant had agreed to repay the amount of Rs.82,000/- in 20  monthly installments at the rate of 4100/- per month  the complainant did not remit the amount  and  the complainant had remitted the  amount only    belatedly and an amount of Rs.13,790/- was due to the opposite parties.  Hence, the certificates required by the complainant could not   be issued.   Contending that there was no deficiency in service, the opposite parties prayed for the dismissal of the complaint with costs.

          4. The evidence consisted of the documents produced by the complainant and the opposite parties as Exts.A1 to A4 on the side of the complainant and B1 & B2 on the side of the opposite parties.

          5. Heard both sides.

          6. The learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued before us that the order of the Forum below is perse illegal and unsustainable.  He submitted before us that the Forum below had passed the impugned order without appreciating the documents (Ext. B1 & B2) especially Ext.B1 payment schedule.  He invited our attention to B1 statement and submitted that in  Ext B1 page 2, it is clearly stated that the complainant had paid the amounts paid belatedly and    hence interest at the rate of    36% was also to be paid by the complainant.  Hence, it is his very case that the complainant ought to have paid Rs.13,790/- and the Forum below had gone wrong in directing the appellants to issue the certificates without any payment by the complainant.

7. The learned counsel for the 1^st respondent/complainant supported the findings and conclusions of the Forum below.  It is his  case that the complainant had remitted   the whole amount due to the opposite parties and  the Forum was just and correct in issuing the directions to the appellants for issuing the no objection certificate,  higher purchase termination certificate and also the confirmation letter.  It was also submitted before us that all the installments were paid to the opposite parties though not on time and the opposite parties had charged exorbitant rate of interest for the belated period.    It is his further case that the forum below ought to have issued compensation also.

          8. On a perusal of Ext.B1, we find that the first page contains the payment schedule and the second page contains the due dates and the actual dates of payment by the complainant.  We find that the instalments were paid on a subsequent date and the opposite parties have calculated the penal interest at 36%.  We find that it is on a very higher side though the opposite parties would argue that the complainant had agreed to pay the penal amounts at the rate of 36%.  We find   that the opposite parties had taken no action in timely intimating the complainant about the belated payments and directing the complainant to pay the amounts on time.  In the circumstances, the amount of Rs.13,790/- arrived at on the  basis of 36% is on a higher side and   the second opposite party is directed to collect penal interest @ 10% per annum only for the belated payments and   to release the documents as ordered by the forum below.  The amount   is to be paid by the respondent/complainant within 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the appellant/opposite party would be entitled for interest at the rate of 12%.  In the facts and circumstances of the present appeal, the parties are directed to suffer their respective costs.

          The office is directed to forward the LCR along with the copy of this order to the Forum urgently.

 S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR --  MEMBER

 VALSALA SARANGADHARAN -- MEMBER