Date of Filing : 21/07/2014
Order No. 22 dt, 04/12/2017
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant purchased a car in the name of her husband Subrata Bhar from o.p. no.1. In order to purchase the said car the complainant paid an amount of Rs.4,56,149/-. The car was delivered to the complainant on 21.6.11. It appears from the delivery challan the car was hypothecated to HDFI Bank Ltd. though the complainant paid the entire amount from her own fund and the complainant never obtained any loan from o.p. bank. The Ganges Ford has not explained the complainant why it was written ‘Hypothecated to HDFC Bank Ltd.’ in the delivery challan. After the demise of Subrata Bhar the husband of the complainant submitted an application to PVD for transferring the car in her name, but the PVD expressed their inability to transfer the name of the car of the complainant on the plea that NOC is required from HDFC Bank Ltd. to remove the word ‘Hypothecated to HDFC Bank Ltd.’ The complainant contacted the HDFC Bank but HDFC Bank assured the complainant that they would not remove the name unless a sum of Rs.10,000/- is paid to them to release the hypothecation. The complainant in spite of persuasion did not get any positive reply from the bank for which the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps. for compensation and other reliefs.
The o.ps. contested this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. In their w/v o.p. no.1 stated that the complainant is not a consumer in terms of the provision of the C.P. Act and there was no hypothecation of the said vehicle in any bank bearing regn. no.WB 06G 5799 and the record of PVD shows that the owner as Mithu Bhar and the vehicle was not hypothecated to any bank. The car was purchased in the year 2011 and as per the complainant the vehicle was ‘Hypothecated to HDFC Bank Ltd.’ was known to her since 2011 and the case was not filed within 2 years and therefore the case is not maintainable. The complainant could not file any document to show that she had to pay the amount of Rs.10,000/- to release from the bank regarding the erasing the work ‘Hypothecated to HDFC Bank Ltd.’ In view of the said fact o.p. no.1 prayed for dismissal of the case.
In their w/v o.p. no.2 denied that there was any relationship between the complainant and o.p. no.1. The o.p. bank also stated that they never demanded a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the complainant to remove the hypothecation or the complainant paid any amount as alleged at all. There was no unfair trade practice on the part of o.p. bank and the complainant will not be entitled to get any relief as prayed for.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:
- Whether the complainant purchased the car by paying cash amount?
- Whether o.p. no.1 wrongly recorded the vehicle was ‘Hypothecated to HDFC Bank Ltd.’?
- Whether the complainant suffered for such wrongful act on the part of o.p. no.1?
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of o.ps.?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons:
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant purchased a car in the name of her husband Subrata Bhar from o.p. no.1. In order to purchase the said car the complainant paid an amount of Rs.4,56,149/-. The car was delivered to the complainant on 21.6.11. It appears from the delivery challan the car was hypothecated to HDFI Bank Ltd. though the complainant paid the entire amount from her own fund and the complainant never obtained any loan from o.p. bank. The Ganges Ford has not explained the complainant why it was written ‘Hypothecated to HDFC Bank Ltd.’ in the delivery challan. After the demise of Subrata Bhar the husband of the complainant submitted an application to PVD for transferring the car in her name, but the PVD expressed their inability to transfer the name of the car of the complainant on the plea that NOC is required from HDFC Bank Ltd. to remove the word ‘Hypothecated to HDFC Bank Ltd.’ The complainant contacted the HDFC Bank but HDFC Bank assured the complainant that they would not remove the name unless a sum of Rs.10,000/- is paid to them to release the hypothecation. The complainant in spite of persuasion did not get any positive reply from the bank for which the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps. for compensation and other reliefs.
Ld. lawyer for the o.p. no.1 argued that the complainant is not a consumer in terms of the provision of the C.P. Act and there was no hypothecation of the said vehicle in any bank bearing regn. no.WB 06G 5799 and the record of PVD shows that the owner as Mithu Bhar and the vehicle was not hypothecated to any bank. The car was purchased in the year 2011 and as per the complainant the vehicle was ‘Hypothecated to HDFC Bank Ltd.’ was known to her since 2011 and the case was not filed within 2 years and therefore the case is not maintainable. The complainant could not file any document to show that she had to pay the amount of Rs.10,000/- to release from the bank regarding the erasing the work ‘Hypothecated to HDFC Bank Ltd.’ In view of the said fact o.p. no.1 prayed for dismissal of the case.
Ld. lawyer for the o.p. no.2 argued that o.p. no.2 denied that there was any relationship between the complainant and o.p. no.1. The o.p. bank also stated that they never demanded a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the complainant to remove the hypothecation or the complainant paid any amount as alleged at all. There was no unfair trade practice on the part of o.p. bank and the complainant will not be entitled to get any relief as prayed for.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainant purchased the vehicle by paying the amount through a cheque and the said amount was encashed and thereafter the vehicle was delivered to the complainant’s husband. It is found from the materials on record that at the time of delivery of the vehicle to the complainant wrongly recorded the work ‘Hypothecated to HDFC Bank Ltd.’ After the demise of the complainant’s husband the complainant went to PDV for changing the name of registration she came to learn that it was recorded in the PVD that the vehicle was ‘Hypothecated to HDFC Bank Ltd.’ for such recording the complainant had suffered. It appears from the material on record that there was gross mistake on the part of o.p. no.1, therefore o.p. no.1 will be held liable for the compensation to be paid to the complainant for her sufferance. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered,
That the CC No.483/2014 is allowed on contest with cost against the o.p. no.1 and dismissed on contest without cost against the o.p. no.2. The o.p. no.1 is directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only to the complainant as compensation for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand) only within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 8% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization and if the name of the complainant is not recorded in the PVD, the o.p. no.2 bank is directed to issue a NOC letter in favour of the complainant mentioning therein that the vehicle is not ‘Hypothecated to HDFC Bank Ltd.’
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
