BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

C.C. No. 251/2009 Filed on 24.09.2009

Dated : 30.06.2010

Complainant:

Anil Kumar. G, Kareenchal Puthen Veedu, Kizhamachal, Ambalathinkala P.O, Kattakkada.

Opposite parties :

1. Attukal Auto Consultant, Muhammed Tower, Kesavadasapuram, Thiruvananthapuram.

    

2. Sasi, Aparna Finance, Kochar Road, Valiyasala, Thiruvananthapuram.

This O.P having been taken as heard on 17.06.2010, the Forum on 30.06.2010 delivered the following :

ORDER

SMT. S.K. SREELA, MEMBER

The complainant has approached the Forum with the following grievances. That the complainant who is a TB patient had purchased an autorikshaw on 20.04.2009 for earning his livelihood. He had availed a loan from the opposite parties for Rs. 20,000/- and when the complainant went to collect the money the next day as instructed by the opposite parties, the complainant was given only Rs. 13,500/- and on enquiry he was told that the balance amount will be paid only after the change in name in the R.C Book. Moreover Rs. 1,300/- was collected towards insurance. On receipt of the C.C. Book, it was noted that Rs. 1,900/- per month for 15 months had to be paid, but on the request of the complainant they demanded for Rs. 1,500/- per month for a period of 20 months which was also not amenable to the complainant and when objected, the complainant was threatened by the opposite parties. On 02.06.2009, complainant had remitted Rs. 1,500/- vide D.D through the 2^nd opposite party and they collected Rs. 20/- extra towards D.D charge. Now the opposite parties are threatening the complainant and are trying to seize the vehicle. Hence this compliant for redressal of his grievances.

Inspite of acceptance of notice from the Forum, the opposite parties never turned up to contest the case nor have they filed their version. Hence opposite parties remain exparte.

Complainant, PW1, has filed affidavit and marked Exts. P1 to P4. PW1 has not been cross examined and hence his affidavit stands unchallenged.

The issue to be considered is whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs prayed for.

The point:- The complainant is a T.B patient who is driving autorikshaw for earning his livelihood. According to him, though the opposite parties had agreed to finance the vehicle for Rs. 20,000/-, the complainant was given only Rs. 13,500/-. Complainant has produced documents to support his complaint. As per Ext. P3, the hire rental payments, the complainant has remitted Rs. 1,500/- on 04.06.2009. Though the amount to be remitted in 15 instalments is stated as Rs. 1,900/-, it has been further recorded as 1500x20. The complainant has pleaded that the opposite parties are threatening him that they will seize the vehicle and if the complainant plies the vehicle on road, the complainant will be killed by hitting with another vehicle. And accordingly the complainant's vehicle was hit by another vehicle also.

We have gone through the pleadings in the complaint and the documents produced by the complainant. The complainant has pleaded that his R.C Book is with the opposite party and the name therein has not been changed. It is a fact that a vehicle cannot be plied on road without R.C Book. Hence in this case also, the complainant could not ply the vehicle as his R.C Book has not been returned to him by the opposite parties. This act of the opposite parties definitely amounts to deficiency in service. Furthermore the complainant has defaulted the payment of instalments since he has been deprived of earning his livelihood solely for the reason that his R.C Book has not been returned to him by the opposite parties.

PW1 has not been cross examined and hence his affidavit stands unchallenged. In the above circumstance, taking into consideration the condition of the poor consumer who is a chronic TB patient and on the strength of the uncontroverted affidavit of the complainant, we allow the complaint. The complainant is found entitled to get R.C Book back, besides Rs. 50/- stamp paper signed by the complainant and his wife, agreement along with the cheque leaf in his wife's name given by the complainant to the opposite parties.

In the result, complaint is allowed. Opposite parties shall return complainant's R.C Book, the stamp paper signed by the complainant and his wife, the cheque leaf of the complainant's wife and the agreement, to the complainant within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order. The complainant shall remit the balance amount of Rs. 12,000/- in 4 equal monthly instalments from September 2010 onwards. Further the opposite parties are hereby restrained from seizing the vehicle of the complainant.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 30^th day of June 2010.

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

jb

C.C. No. 251/2009

APPENDIX

I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :

PW1 - Anilkumar. G

II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :

P1 - Copy of acknowledgement card addressed to the complainant.

P2 - Copy of acknowledgement card addressed to the complainant.

P3 - Copy of the rental payments.

P4 - Copy of agreement.

III OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESS :

NIL

IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS :

NIL

PRESIDENT