Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/4/2018

Sri. Mohammed rafi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Cholamandalam Fin., Co., Limited, - Opp.Party(s)

K.Veerabhadrappa

16 Nov 2018

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:17/01/2018

DISPOSED      ON:16/11/2018

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

CC.NO:4/2018

 

DATED: 16^th NOVEMBER 2018

PRESENT :-     SRI.T.N.SREENIVASAIAH :   PRESIDENT                                     B.A., LL.B.,

                        SMT. JYOTHI RADHESH JEMBAGI

BSc.,MBA., DHA.,                LADY MEMBER

 

……COMPLAINANT/S	Sri. Mohammed Rafi, S/o Anwar Sab, Aged about 50 years, House No. 30 Horapete, Chitradurga.   (Rep by Sri.K. Veerabhadrappa, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	1. Cholamandalam Invest Fin., Co., Limited, 2nd Floor, Opp Neelakanteshwara Temple, Next to Janatha Bazar, Chitradurga-577501.   2. Cholamandalam Invest Fin Co., Limited, AVK College Road Upstair Alahabad Bank, Davanagere.   3. Cholamandalam Investment Finance Limited, P.B. No. 2633, C-54-55, Thiru Vika Industrial Estate, Opp Mical Guindy Chennai-600032.   (Rep by Sri.Y.H.Yogendranath, Advocate)

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH:   PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 for the relief to direct the OPs to waive off the interest up to Rs.1,00,000/- and to pay the balance amount after deducting the due amount out of total value of Rs.4,50,000/- as valued by the insurance surveyor and loss assessor and to grant such other reliefs.

2.      The brief facts of the case of the above complainant are that, the complainant is the RC owner of the lorry bearing Registration bearing KA-16 A-2269 and the same has been purchased from the loan obtained by the OPs for a sum of Rs.3,58,700/- and hypothecated the same on 25.11.2014.  At the time of obtaining the loan, the complainant has entered into an agreement with the OPs and agreed to repay the above said loan amount within 36 monthly installments of Rs.14,650/-,  The first installment was commenced from 01.01.2015 to 01.12.2017.  After obtaining the loan, the complainant has paid nearly Rs.3,69,485/- to the OPs.  After that, the complainant has sustained heavy loss and mental agony and ill-health due to non-operation of his transport vehicle and hence he has decided to handover the said vehicle with OP on 01.01.2018.  Before that, the complainant has got surveyed his vehicle on 01.01.2018 with Insurance Surveyor by name Sri. M.C. Himath Kedar, who assessed the said vehicle for Rs.4,50,000/- on 01.01.2018. After that, the OP has issued the notice to the complainant and demanded to pay a sum of Rs.2,09,000/- towards loan amount.  Accordingly, the complainant has approached the OPs asking to pay the remaining amount after deducting the amount of Rs.2,09,684/- from Rs.4,50,000/-.  But the OPs have failed to the same and the complainant has got issued legal notice to the OPs on 08.01.2018, the same has been duly served to OP No.1 and 2 but, they failed to reply the notice and they did not turn up to pay the balance amount till today.  The cause of action for this complaint arose on 01.01.2018 when the OPs have took delivery of the vehicle of the complainant and on 08.01.2018 when the legal notice has been issued to the OPs on 09.01.2018 when the notice has been served to the OP No.1 and 2 which is within the jurisdiction of this Forum and prays for allow the complaint.

3.      On service of notice, OPs appeared through Sri.Y.H. Yogendranath, Advocate and filed version.  According to the version filed by the OPs that, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint  because Sec.2(d) is not attract to the above complaint and raised a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability, the same is to be tried before the Arbitration at Chennai as the same is the competent authority to decide the matter.  The complainant is not a consumer under the C.P. Act.  There is no relationship between the complainant and the OPs.  It is true that the complainant has obtained loan from the OPs for the purpose of purchasing the lorry bearing Registration No.KA-16 A-2269 for Rs.3,69,150/- by hypothecating the above said vehicle.  Further it is true that, the complainant has agreed to repay the above said loan within 01.12.2017.  The complainant himself return the above said vehicle on 01.01.2018 and the OPs have send a letter to the complainant demanding to pay the balance amount of Rs.2,09,684/- as on 02.01.2018, but the complainant fails to repay the above said amount.  Further it is stated that the complainant has to pay overdue installment along with additional financial charges of Rs.1,50,403/-.  The OPs have issued pre-seizure notice to the Kote Police Station, Chitradurga on 01.01.2018.  The complainant has forfeited all his right and he became liable to pay the entire outstanding amount.  The vehicle in question was hypothecated always remained with the OPs and they have got every right to repossess and sell under the contract.  The OPs have given sufficient time to the complainant to discharge his part of the liability, he did not come forward to pay the outstanding due.  Further it is stated that the insurance surveyor and loss assessor M.C. Himath Kedar and this complainant are colluding with each other and created the documents and valued the vehicle of the complainant for Rs.4,50,000/- which is highly illegal and the insurance surveyor is not the proper person to value the complainant’s vehicle since the complainant’s vehicle is too old and the same is of 2005 model.  The Surveyor and complainant colluded with each other and valued the said vehicle for Rs.4,50,000/- and hence prayed for dismissal of the complaint.    

4.      Complainant himself has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-10 were got marked and closed his side. On behalf of OPs, one Sri. Thippeswamy. K, Legal Co-Ordinator of OP No.2 has examined as DW-1 by filing the affidavit evidence and no documents have been got marked and closed their side.  

 

5.      Arguments of both sides heard.

6.      Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaints are that;

 

(1)  Whether the complainant proves that the OPs have committed deficiency of service for non returning of the remaining amount after deducting the amount of Rs.2,09,684/- from Rs.4,50,000/-, the value as assessed by the insurance surveyor and entitled for the reliefs as prayed for in the above complaint?

              (2) What order?

          7.      Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

          Point No.1:- Partly in Affirmative. 

          Point No.2:- As per final order.

 

 

REASONS

8.      It is the case of the complainant that, there is no dispute between the parties that, the complainant is the RC owner of the vehicle bearing Registration No.KA-16 A-2269 and further there is no dispute pertains to obtaining of loan facilities from the OPs for Rs.3,58,700/- and there is no dispute between the parties that, the complainant has repaid the amount of Rs.3,69,486/- towards the loan amount and the complainant himself has handed over the above said vehicle to the OPs on 01.01.2018.  One Sri. M.C. Himmat Kedar valued the said vehicle before handing over the vehicle to the OPs and he is the insurance surveyor and the authorized person.  At the time of handing over the vehicle, the value of the said vehicle is of Rs.4,50,000/-.  The OPs have issued notice to the complainant after receiving the vehicle from the complainant and demanded for Rs.2,09,684/- which is due.  No doubt the insurance surveyor has valued the vehicle for Rs.4,50,000/-.  The documents produced by the complainant are clearly shows that the complainant is the RC owner of the vehicle, the vehicle is valued for Rs.4,50,000/- on 01.01.2018.  But the OPs argued that it is true that the complainant has obtained a loan from them and after obtaining the loan, he has paid nearly Rs.3,69,486/- to the OPs.  The remaining amount of Rs.2,09,684/- is to be paid by the complainant towards the loan dues. 

    9.  We have gone through the entire documents filed by the complainant and affidavit of OPs.  The OPs clearly admitted that the complainant has to pay the remaining amount of Rs.2,09,684/- on 02.01.2018 as per the statement.  The authorized surveyor has assessed the value of the vehicle for Rs.4,50,000/- on 01.01.2018, it is admissible, because the said surveyor is an authorized insurance valuer.  The OPs have stated in their version and affidavit that, the surveyor and complainant are colluding with each other.  But the OPs have not come forward to cross-examine the authorized surveyor.  The authorized surveyor has filed his affidavit before this Forum.  In his affidavit, it is clearly stated that, the vehicle was valued for the above said amount.  But the OPs have not come forward to disprove the case of the complainant by producing documents, which shows that, the OPs have committed deficiency of service for non-returning of the remaining amount to the complainant.  Hence, this Forum comes to the conclusion that, the complainant is entitled for the compensation.   Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.          

 

            10.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is partly allowed.

It is further ordered that the OPs are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,40,336/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a from the date of complaint till realization.

It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards costs of this proceedings to the complainant. 

It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

 (This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 16/11/2018 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)         

 

 

                                     

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

PW-1:  Complainant by way of affidavit evidence.

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs:

DW-1:  Thippeswamy. KJ, Legal Co-ordinator by way of affidavit evidence. 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Form 23A
02	Ex-A-2:-	Form KMV 45
03	Ex-A-3:-	Insurance Policy
04	Ex-A-4:-	Letter dated 01.01.2018 by the OPs
05	Ex.A-5:-	Vehicle inventory
06	Ex.A-6:-	Valuation Report dated 01.01.2018
07	Ex.A-7:-	Photos
08	Ex.A-8:-	Legal notice dated 08.01.2018
09	Ex.A-9:-	3 postal receipts
10	Ex.A-10:-	Statement of account from 01.10.2014 to 01.01.2018

 

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

-Nil-

 

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

Rhr**