By Sri. MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
1. The complaint in short is as follows:-
Complainant is a self employed person and he purchased a vehicle KL-65-M-2335 for her self-employment. The agents of the opposite party contacted the complainant and offered financial assistance for purchase of the vehicle. The opposite party sanctioned Rs. 74,000/- as loan for the vehicle and the repayment period of loan was 36 months.
2. In order to sanction the loan the opposite party directed the complainant and sureties put signature in many printed forms , blank forms , a book form containing so many blank records, vouchers, copy of identity cards , signed stamp papers and 12 number of signed blank cheque leaves, copy of the title deed of sureties etc were handed over. It was informed that, the interest is calculated at flat rate and the complaint is bound to pay the interest and principal in 36 months’ time in instalments. The opposite party issued a chart for the payment. It was also informed that for the convenience the complainant can pay the same in monthly instalments in the direction given to the complainant. The complainant paid the loan amount in excess to close the loan. Some months, double the instalments were paid to clear the loan. In fact 11times two instalments were paid in single month. As per the records the last date of payment was 08/10/2021. The loan liability was looming larger day by day and the complainant paid off the dues, due to irreparable loss and hardship caused by the collection agents with untold miseries.
3. The complainant was ready and willing to pay the loan amount before the date of closure. The complainant paid 36 instalments with much hardship and closed the loan even before the last date fixed for the loan. As per the records shown to the complainant, the complainant paid Rs. 74,681/- towards the loan and Rs. 30,943/- towards the interest portion. The loan interest rate was huge and the repayment was difficult. The last payment was done on 08/10/2020 to close the loan. The opposite party taken double payment on 11 occasions in a month and the same was done by cheque as well as direct payment.
4. Meanwhile the Corona came during the period of Corona and thereafter the vehicle was kept idle. The complainant was in dare straits after the corona period. There was no work and the vehicle was kept idle. The complainant contacted the opposite party and requested to give termination records. The first opposite party officials stated that they need more money to close the loan at first Rs. 10,000/- was demanded and thereafter it was enhanced to Rs. 15,000/- to be paid to close the loan. When details are enquired it was seen that, the opposite party is adjusting the paid amount not to the loan amount and they are adjusting the paid amount to inspection charges, additional interest, charged on interest, notice charges, inspection charges, collection charges, idle charges, cheque return charges etc which were not even heard off. On perusal it can be seen that, the first opposite party collected first instalment of the loan on the day of disbursement of loan with insurance charges etc. The promised full amount was not paid by the first opposite party and the first opposite party was cheating the complainant. The officer in charge checked the records and stated that all instalments is due on the day of loan and instalments are collected in advance.
5. The first and second opposite parties calculated charges unheard off with fabricated records. The complainant submitted that, the complainant took a loan a small amount and the agreed interest was 8% per annum and that can be paid in time. The opposite party calculated entire interest from the date of disbursement and added the same with principal, insurance amount etc. and divided the same with months payable. The records speaks that even for the last instalment the full interest is to be paid from the beginning and in effect the promised interest rate was doubled. All these caused much hardship to the complainant. It is submitted that it was a shock to the complainant who was cheated by the first opposite party with false promise and assurances which was given at the beginning.
6. The complainant further submit that the cheque leaves obtained from the complainant by the first opposite party was lost is the information given by the first opposite party officials and the first opposite party directed the complainant to submit stop payment in the bank. There was much quarrel and the staff of the first opposite party were not happy. One person told the complainant that the complainant will suffer for all.
7. The opposite parties endorsed the loan agreement in respect of registration certificate of the vehicle bearing No. KL-65-M-2335 before the second opposite party. The complainant submitted that the first opposite party committed wilful latches, deficiency in service, illegal acts and the same caused irreparable loss and hardship to the complainant. The other opposite party was impleaded for just decision of the case.
8. The prayer of the complaint is that to direct the first opposite party to issue hire purchase agreement records to the complainant, If first opposite failed to issue hire termination letter/Form 35, the Commission be pleased to order the 2nd opposite party to cancel the endorsement the registration records of KL-65-M-2335 and also to pay a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- with the cost of the proceedings.
9. On admission of the complaint notice was issued to the opposite parties and the notice against first opposite party returned stating as “left”. Hence the first opposite party set exparte. The second opposite party entered appearance and filed version. The second opposite filed version contending that vehicle No.KL65-M-2335 stands registered in the office of this authority and due respect, it is submitted the second opposite party is not a party to the hire purchase agreement between the complainant and first opposite party. As per section 51 (3) of the Motor Vehicles act 1988, the second opposite party is bound to cancel the hire purchase agreement only on production of the proof of termination of the said agreement by the parties to it in form 35 along with prescribed fee. It is submitted that no application has been received by the second opposite party and so the second opposite party cannot be held responsible for the mental agony and monetary loss caused to the complainant. It is further submitted that as and when in accordance with the provisions of Section 51(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 is filed the necessary endorsement cancelling the hypothecation on the vehicle will be made in the registration certificate.
10. The complainant filed affidavits and documents. The documents marked as Ext.A1 on the side of complainant. The second opposite party though filed version no affidavit is seen filed. Hence the second opposite party is also set exparte. The documents on the side of complainant produced is called to be accounts statements from 29/09/2018 to 23/06/2021 dated 23/06/2021 which is marked as Ext. A1.
11. Heard complainant, perused affidavit and documents.
12. The case of the complaint is that he availed loan from the first opposite party and agreed to repay the loan amount through 36 monthly instalments. It is submitted that though he paid the entire amount the first opposite party did not issue papers for cancellation of HP endorsement from the registration certificate and also did not issue the documents obtained from the complainant at the time of executing the Hire purchase agreement.
13. Though the opposite parties did not contested the complaint properly, the complainant has not produced documents to substantiate the case of complainant. The complainant submitted that there is hire purchase endorsement in the registration certificate of the vehicle. But the complainant did not produce registration certificate of the vehicle. The complainant submitted that there is hire purchase agreement between the parties, but no document is produced in support of the alleged hire purchase agreement. There is no document to show the payment to the opposite parties. Though the complainant filed complaint against first opposite party and notice was issued against first opposite party, it is not certain that the address of first opposite party is correct address of the first opposite party since no documents reveals the address particulars of the first opposite party. The sole document produced by the complainant is Ext. A1 which is claimed to the accounts statement from 29/09/2018 to 23/06/2021. The documents shows that the agreement No.TWC101NR00733590. But there is no record to show the agreement number is above stated one in between the complainant and first opposite party. The account statement in Ext. A1 do not substantiate the averments in the complaint. In the absence of proper documents it will not be just to direct the opposite parties either to issue papers for cancellation of HP endorsement from the RC and also not just to direct second opposite party even in the absence of documents to cancel the HP endorsement from the registration records of vehicle No.KL-65M-2335.
14. Hence upon perusal of affidavit and Ext. A1, the Commission is of the view that the complainant failed to establish the case and so we are not inclined to allow the complaint as prayed and so complaint stands dismissed.
Dated this 31stday of July, 2023.
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1
Ext.A1: Copy of Accounts statements from 29/09/2018 to 23/06/2021 dated
23/06/2021.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Nil
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
