ORDER<br /> <br /> <br /> By Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:<br /> <br /> <br /> Complaint in brief is as follows:-<br /> <br /> The Complainant is the owner of a Tractor numbered KL 12 5189. The Opposite Party is the financier of the vehicle. The Complainant depended mainly this vehicle to eke out his life. The permit of the vehicle was expired on 14.6.2000. The application for the renewal of the permit given by the Complainant was rejected in the absence of No Objection Certificate from the Financier. In order to get the NOC from the Opposite Party, the Complainant approached them several times but all efforts of him were failed. Due to the non issuance of the NOC, the permit could not be renewed and Complainant could not ply the vehicle. The non operation of the Tractor is due to the non payment of the NOC to the Complainant. The Complainant's livelihood was badly affected and there was a financial loss not less than Rs.3,00,000/-. The<br /> (Contd.. . . .. 2)<br /> - 2 -<br /> act of the Opposite Party is the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The Complaint is<br /> filed to direct the Opposite Party to issue the NOC of the vehicle bearing No. KL12 5189 to the Complainant and to pay Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation along with cost to the Complainant.<br /> <br /> The Opposite Party filed version on their appearance. It is admitted that the tractor in the above number is financed by the Opposite Party. The Complainant is a chronic defaulter. Apart from that the Complainant suppressed the material facts regarding the execution of the deed of the hypothecation. The facts about the suite No.O.S.58/99 pending before the Sub Court Sulthan Bathery was also suppressed. The hypothecation of the Tractor numbered KL12 5189 was executed agreeing all the terms and conditions. The stipulations made in the hypothecation deed is binding upon the Complainant. The terms of hypothecation deed was absolutely accepted by the Complainant, the express terms and conditions were breached. The Complainant was intimated to surrender the Tractor before the bank authorities in the reply notice sent by the <br /> Opposite Party's Council. Moreover the insurance premium which was to be renewed by the Complainant was not done by him. The renewal of the insurance premium was done by the Opposite Party. The act of the Complainant is a gross repudiation of the terms and conditions of hypothecation. The Complainant would have been given the NOC, if the amount due as arrear was cleared. A substantial amount was pending from the Complainant to the Opposite Party and even after the repeated demand the complainant had not turned up. The Opposite Party further contended that the allegations of loss and other difficulties are absolutely groundless. The Obligation binding upon the Complainant as an agent was detached only due to the inadvertent attitude of the Complainant. The Complainant also filed the petition numbered O.P. 29818/2001 against the Regional Transport Officer and this Opposite Party for the same relief in the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala. The complaint is on experimental base hence the complaint is to be dismissed with compensatory cost.<br /> (Contd. .. . . . 3)<br /> - 3 - <br /> <br /> The points that are to be considered.<br /> 1.Is there any deficiency in the service rendered by the Opposite Party?<br /> 2.Relief and costs.<br /> Point No.1 and 2: <br /> The point No.1 and 2 can be considered together. The Complainant is examined as PW1, the receipt of the amount remitted in the Office of Regional Transport Office is the Ext. A1. <br /> The letter sent to the Complainant from the Regional Transport Office is the Ext. A2. The Complainant deposed that he was unable to ply the vehicle for hire due to the non renewal of the permit. The Opposite Party did not give any No Objection Certificate for the renewal of the permit, the Manager of the Opposite Party's Bank is examined as OPW1. The certified copy of the memorandum of agreement is marked as Ext.B2. The certified copy of the agreement of hypothecation is the Ext.B3, the clause 5 to 10 is the Ext.B3 (a), the clause 6 in the agreement is <br /> the Ext.B3(b), the claus 12 is marked as Ext.B3(c). The certified copy of acknowledgment of debt and security is the Ext.B4. Ext.B5 is the certified copy of the letter of acknowledgment of debt signed by the Complainant and sureties. The certified copy of the memorandum agreement dated 31.03.1995 is the Ext.B6, debt acknowledgment certified copy dated 20.12.2006 is Ext. B7. As per the terms and conditions of agreement, the Complainant failed to clear the debt it is brought out in evidence that the Complainant sent lawyer notice as per Ext.A4 and the copy of the notice is Ext.A3, it was demanded in the notice to issue the NOC to the Complainant. Whereas in the reply notice the Opposite Party informed the Complainant to surrender the vehicle. The Complainant is right upon the vehicle is nothing apart from a trusty the vehicle is in the role of primary security it is to be noted that from the face of record and evidence the complainant is a defaulter. Apart from that the Complainant had also filed the petition numbered O.P.29818/2000 for an order to the Opposite Party to issue the NOC to the Complainant.<br /> (Contd. .. . . . 4)<br /> - 4 - <br /> It is seen that the Complainant filed petitions in the Honorable High Court and at the same time <br /> the complaint is filed in this Forum, the point No.1 is found against the Complainant. There is no order upon cost.<br /> <br /> In the result the complaint is dismissed no cost.<br /> <br /> <br /> Pronounced in open Forum on this the 17th day of October 2007.<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT: Sd/-<br /> MEMBER: Sd/-<br /> /True Copy/<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.<br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> Witnesses for Complainant:<br /> PW1 Paulose Complainant. <br /> PW2. Sukumaran. Manager cum Farmer.<br /> PW3. Evarald Morris. M.V.I, Wayanad.<br /> <br /> Witnesses for Opposite Party:<br /> OPW1. M. Mohanan. Manager, S.M.G.B.<br /> OPW2. Prasanth. Manager, S.M.G.B., Kakkoor.<br /> Exhibits for Complainant:<br /> A1. Acknowledgment for Receipt of Money. <br /> A2. Notice. dt:23.8.2000.<br /> A3. Lawyer notice. dt:26.8.2000.<br /> A4. Postal receipt <br /> A5. Acknowledgment. Dt:28.8.200. (Contd......5)<br /> - 5 -<br /> A6. Letter. Dt:8.06.2000.<br /> <br /> X1. Copy of Goods Carriage Permit. Dt:15.6.1995. <br /> X2. Copy of Policy schedule. <br /> X3. Copy of Proposal for Motor Insurance of <br /> Commercial Vehicles. <br /> <br /> Exhibits for Opposite Party:<br /> B1. Copy of Promissory note. Dt:31.3.1995.<br /> <br /> B2. Copy of Memorandum of Agreement for <br /> Agricultural loan. Dt:31.3.1995.<br /> <br /> B3. Copy of Hypothecation Agreement <br /> Relating to Motor Vehicle. Dt:28.3.1995. <br /> <br /> B3(a) The clause 5 to 10 of the Agreement.<br /> <br /> B3(b) The clause 6 of the Agreement.<br /> <br /> B3(c) The clause 12 of the Agreement.<br /> <br /> B4. Copy of Aknowledgement of Debt and <br /> Security. Dt:20.12.1996.<br /> <br /> B5. Copy of Aknowledgement of Debt and <br /> Security. Dt:22.12.1998.<br /> <br /> B6. Copy of Memorandum of Agreement. Dt:31.3.1995.<br /> <br /> B7. Copy of Aknowledgement of Debt and <br /> Security. Dt: 20.12.1996<br /> <br /> B8. Copy of Aknowledgement of Debt and <br /> Security. Dt:22.12.1998.<br /> <br /> B9. Copy of Pronote Register.<br /> <br /> B10. Copy of Letter.<br /> <br /> B11. Copy of Policy dt:28.6.2000 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> M/-<br />