IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA. Dated this the 29th day of November, 2010. Present:- Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member) Sri. N. Premkumar (Member) C.C.No.107/07 (Filed on 09.11.2007) Between: S. Mohankumar, S/o. T.N. Sreedharan , Thayyil House, Konni.P.O., Mangaram Muri, Konni Village. (By Adv. R. Sunil) ….. Complainant And: 1. ICICI Bank Ltd., rep. by its- Branch Manager, Pathanamthitta. (By Adv. Mammen Pappy Adeneth) 2. The Collection Manager (Car Loans), ICICI Bank Ltd., Kollam. 3. Suresh. G. Nair, Officer (Car Loans), ICICI Bank Ltd., Kollam. 4. The Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd., Pathanamthitta Branch. ….. Opposite parties. O R D E R Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member): The complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite parties for getting a relief from the Forum. 2. The facts of the complaint is as follows:- The complainant has availed a vehicle loan from opposite parties bank at Kollam branch for an amount of ` 1,30,000 for purchasing a Maruthi ALTO Car. On 30.5.03 the officials of the 3rd opposite party approached the complainant at his residence, Konni and sanctioned the loan repayable in 60 equalised monthly instalment at the rate of ` 2,710. The papers taken by the opposite parties have signed by the complainant towards security for the loan. In addition to that they have collected 5 blank cheque leaves of ICICI bank for a sum of ` 31,978 each. At the residence of the complainant, 3rd opposite party opened an account and issued cheque book in favour of the complainant. Consequently the 1st opposite party paid the loan amount to the Popular Automobiles after deducting the I EMI, and the complainant has purchased the car on June 2003. The deduction of 1st EMI from the loan amount is against the terms of the loan agreement. On 1.7.03 the complainant contacted the 2nd and 3rd opposite party and enquired about the mode of repayment of the loan. As per the advice given by them, the complainant sent a registered letter to the Chief Manager of the bank requesting him to communicate the mode of repayment. A cheque dated 3.7.03 for a sum of ` 2,710 drawn on the Indian bank, Pathanamthitta was also enclosed in the letter. But the cheque was not encashed. The copy of the letter was also sent to the 1st and 3rd opposite party. But the opposite parties have not responded. Further the complainant again sent a letter on 4.8.03 to the Branch Manager of Kollam by enclosing two cheques vide Nos.140205 and 146206 for an amount of ` 2,710 each towards the 3rd and 4th EMI. However, the opposite parties had not responded. 3. Being aggrieved by this, the complainant had sent a letter to the Collection Manager, Thiruvananthapuram along with Demand Draft dated 30.8.03 for an amount of ` 8,130 drawn on the Indian Bank, Pathanamthitta and the copies of the correspondence made by the complainant with the opposite parties till the date. But there was no reply from him. The cheque was not encashed or returned to the complainant. Finally the complainant was forced to remit the amount with their bank at Kumbanadu fearing penal consequences. In meantime the 1st opposite party has opened a branch at Pathanamthitta and the complainant had transferred his account there for making the payment. The complainant was charged with a sum of ` 99 towards ATM charges. The complainant was forced to operate their ATM facility for the sole reason that they have no passbook facility; the ATM is the only way of remittance. Again aggrieved by this charges the complainant requested the 4th opposite party to withdraw the ATM facility provided to him and the complainant is ready to pay the amount through Pathanamthitta Branch. The opposite parties have closed the account by penalizing him ` 210 towards closure charge. The opposite parties charged the complainant a sum of ` 150 on 1.8.03, ` 99 on 23.8.04 and finally ` 210. Surprised by this complainant has issued a letter on 1.10.04 to 3rd opposite party requesting to co-operate the complainant to remit the entire loan amount. But there is no reply from him. After that the complainant had remitted the instalments through their collection agent at Pathanamthitta. Being aggrieved by all these things the complainant paid the entire amount due to them through 2 demand drafts dated 12.11.05 for a sum of ` 45,600 and ` 45,000 drawn on the Indian Bank, Pathanamthitta. As per the Amortization Schedule provided to the complainant, the complainant had remitted ` 90,600 due to the opposite parties as on 1.2.05. The complainant has also made a request to close the car loan and to return the 5 cheques received from as the collateral security for the loan, stamp papers and promissory notes signed by the complainant at the time of availing the loan. The complainant has made continuous enquiry over telephone and direct enquiry with the opposite parties. But there is no response from the opposite parties till this date. The complainant intends to purchase a new car after selling the present vehicle for which a clearing letter from the opposite party is necessary. The complainant is entitled to get the entire cheques, other documents and a clearance letter from the opposite parties. In addition to which he is entitled to get back a sum of Rs.469 unauthorizedly deducted from the complainant’s account with interest. Due to the non-returning of these documents by the opposite parties, the complainant suffered mental agony, fear and other inconvenience. The opposite parties are liable to compensate the same. Hence he filed this complaint against the opposite parties for getting an order for directing the opposite parties to return the cheque, other documents signed by the complainant at the time of availing the loan and ` 459 unauthorizedly taken from the complainant together with interest and to give clearance letter for releasing the hypothecation and also directing the opposite parties to pay compensation and cost to the complainant. The complainant prays for granting the relief. 4. The power of attorney holder of the CICI Bank Ltd. Has filed a version in favour of the 1st opposite party stating the following contentions: The complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts and it lacks bonafides. These opposite parties are not necessary parties to this litigation and are only dragged in to this complaint unnecessarily. The 1st and 4th opposite parties are having only banking transaction and these opposite parties does not have vehicle loans at the branch. The vehicle finance was done by the Kollam and Kottayam branches alone. The averment of the complaint that an account was opened at the residence of the complainant and loan was granted at the residence of the petitioner is unbelievable. By the description in the complaint the customer cannot be identified or even to verify the accounts. As per the available details it can be found that the complainant is having an account with the ICICI Bank Ltd., Branch Kollam and not with the branch at Pathanamthitta. The complainant is a stranger to this opposite parties who has put up a false and fabricated case to illegally extract money and make illegal gains from these opposite parties. 5. The complaint is bad for mis-joinder of necessary parties and non-joinder of necessary parties. The entire transactions and communications were with Mumbai, Kollam and Thiruvananthapuram branches, only one registered notice alleged to have been addressed to this opposite parties, which are barred by limitation. The petitioner has come before this Hon’ble Forum with unclean hands by suppressing the material facts and has created a false story and this implicated these opposite parties in this petition only to cause damages to these opposite parties. The complainant has suppressed all the facts and truth and has filed a petition experimentally raising false allegations against these opposite parties. The complainant is not entitled to get any relieves from the opposite parties. These opposite parties are not liable for the cost and compensation to the complainant. Hence this opposite parties prayed for the dismissal of the complaint with their cost. 6. The opposite parties 2 to 4 are not appeared or filed version hence they set exparte and remained as such. 7. The points for consideration in this complaint are: (1) Whether the complaint is maintainable before the Forum? (2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get a relief as prayed for in the complaint? (3) Reliefs & Costs? 8. The evidence in this case consists of the oral evidence of the complainant as PW1 and Ext.A1 to A18 marked for the complainant. For the opposite parties, 1st opposite party has filed two documents and they are marked as Ext.B1 and B2 on the basis of the submission of the 1st opposite party’s counsel. 9. Point Nos. 1 to 3:- The complainant’s case is that he had availed a vehicle loan from the opposite parties bank for an amount of ` 1,30,000. As per the loan agreement repayment was 60 instalments at the rate of ` 2,710/- each. At the time of availing the loan the complainant had paid 5 cheques as a security to the loan and he had signed the papers taken by the 3rd opposite party. The 1st opposite party paid the loan amount to M/s. Popular Automobiles, Kollam and the complainant had purchased the car. Thereafter there is no information was communicated to the complainant regarding the repayment of the loan by the opposite parties. The complainant had sent cheques for EMI to the Chief Manager of the bank. But the cheques were not encashed. After that the complainant contacted the Collection Manager of the bank and sent D.D for sum of ` 8,130 drawn on the Indian Bank. The complainant had sent several letters to the opposite parties, but there is no response from them. The cheques sent were not encashed or returned to the complainant. On 12.11.05 the complainant had paid entire amount through D.D ` 90,600 as per the amortization schedule issued by the opposite parties. After that the complainant requested the opposite parties to closes the loan and returns the cheques and stamp papers and issue the clearance letter for releasing the hypothecation. But there is no response from the opposite parties. Moreover, the opposite parties have unauthorisedly deducted ` 459 from his account. Hence the complainant has filed this complaint for getting the relief as sought for in the complaint. 10. In order to prove the complainant’s case, the complainant has adduced oral evidence as PW1 and Ext.A1 to A18 marked. Ext.A1 is the letter dated 30.5.03 issued by the 3rd opposite party to the complainant. Ext.A2 is the o/c of the letter dated 3.7.03 issued by the complainant to the Chief Manager of opposite party. Ext.A3 is the postal receipt of Ext.A2. Ext.A4 is the certificate of posting dated 3.7.03 for the letter sent to the 1st and 3rd opposite party. Ext.A5 is the o/c of the letter dated 4.8.03 issued by the complainant to the opposite parties. Ext.A6 is the o/c of the letter dated 30.8.03 sent by the complainant to the Collection Manager of the Bank. Ext.A7 is the postal receipt for Ext.A6. Ext.A8 is the o/c of the letter dated 1.10.04 issued by the complainant to the opposite parties. Ext.A9 series are the postal receipts for sending Ext.A8 letter to the opposite parties. Ext.A10 is the receipt dated 15.11.2004 for the payment of EMI of October and November 2004. Ext.A11 is the receipt dated 17.01.2005 for the payment of EMI of January 2005. Ext.A12 is the receipt dated 18.02.2005 for the payment of instalment of January and February 2005. Ext.A13 and A13(a) are the two counterfoil of the D.D’s dated 12.11.05 issued by the Indian Bank, Pathanamthitta. Ext.A14 and A14(a) are the copy of D.D’s in favour of the opposite party bank. Ext.A15 is the Amortization Schedule of the complainant’s loan account issued by the opposite parties. Ext.A16 is the office copy of the letter dated 12.11.05 issued by the complainant to the 2nd opposite party. Ext.A17 is the postal receipt of Ext.A16. Ext.A18 is the postal receipt for sending Ext.A16 letter to the 4th opposite party. 11. The 1st opposite party’s counsel has been cross-examined the complainant. 12. The 1st opposite party contended that they have only banking transaction and does not have vehicle loans. The vehicle finance was done by the Kollam and Kottayam branch. From the details it can be found that the complainant is having an account with ICICI Bank at Kollam Branch. The complainant is a stranger to this opposite parties. 13. In order to prove the contentions of 1st opposite party, there is no oral evidence from the part of them. The two documents produced by the 1st opposite party is marked as Ext.B1 and B2. Ext.B1 is the Certification Under a statement of account certified by the Manager in charge/Account ICICI Bank. Ext.B2 is the statement of accounts of the complainant’s loan account. 14. There is no oral or documentary evidence from the opposite parties 2 to 4 as they are exparte. 15. From the pleadings and averments, we have perused all the materials on records in this case. On going through the records we can see that the complainant had availed a vehicle loan from 2nd opposite party for an amount of ` 1,30,000. As per the terms and conditions of the loan agreement the complainant has to be paid ` 2,710 with 60 equalized monthly instalments. Ext.A1 shows that the 2nd opposite party has collected 5 cheques from the complainant as the security of the loan. From the Ext.B2 we can see that the complainant has not been paid all the instalment on due date. As per Ext.B2 statement of the account of the complainant’s loan account the complainant shall be paid the loan instalment on the 1st day of every month. The terms and conditions of the loan agreement shall have specifically stated the due date of EMI, undue charges the duration, etc. about the vehicle loan. The loan agreement has not been produced by both the parties. From the evidence, we can see that the complainant had made several communications to the Chief Manager, 2nd opposite party and other higher officials of the opposite party bank to get the direction for repayment of the loan and the due date. But complainant has not produced any A/d cards for the acceptance of these letters by the addressees and there is no reply from them. 16. Ext.A13 and A13(a) counterfoils of D.D shows that the complainant had paid an amount of Rs.90,600 in favour of ICICI Bank on 12.11.05. According to the complainant it was the actual balance loan amount due to the opposite parties from him as per the Amortization Schedule issued by the opposite party. And the complainant had made a request to close the car loan and return the cheques received from him and other documents and clearance certificate. On a perusal of Ext.A15 Amortization Schedule the outstanding principal amount on 1.2.05 is ` 90,597.50. If the complainant had duly paid the instalments his liability is only ` 90,597.50 on 1.2.05. It was asserted by the complainant that he has paid entire amount of finance with interest to the opposite parties. 17. We have gone through the Ext.B2 statements and considered the figures mentioned in such account. From perusal of this statement it appears that amount of ` 90,000/- was deposited by the complainant on 5.12.05 has been adjusted in the loan account. From Ext.B2, we find that whatever amount has been paid by the complainant has been deposited against the instalment. There was some delayed payment and default in instalments. The principal amount of finance with interest has not been paid by the complainant. Now remains ` 41,901 as per Ext.B2. The complainant is a defaulter of EMI. The complainant has the duty to pay the instalments promptly to the 2nd opposite party on due date. The mode of payment and the issuance of receipts and penal charges are agreed between both the parties at the time of agreement and signed by the parties. Whatever may be the reason for default the complainant has the boundan duty to pay the entire loan amount (EMI) in due time to the opposite parties. Otherwise he will be penalized as per the terms and conditions of the loan agreement. The complainant has not produced any evidence to show that he had remitted whole loan amount with interest to the opposite parties without any due as per the agreement and closed the loan account. Besides that he has not challenged or objected the Ext.B2 statement of accounts produced by the 1st opposite party. Without clearing the loan dues as per Ext.B2, the complainant is not entitled to get the documents and clearance certificate from the opposite parties. 18. Further allegation of the complainant is that the 1st opposite party was unauthorisedly deducted ` 99 towards the ATM charge and other penal charges of ` 459 from his account. There is no evidence such as account extract of the complainant’s account with 1st opposite party for proving this allegation. From the over all facts and circumstances of this complaint, the complainant has not remitted the EMI promptly on due dates or closed the loan account. Hence the complainant is not entitled to get the documents and clearance certificate without clearing the loan dues. In the circumstances, we couldn’t find any deficiency in service from the part of opposite parties. The allegations raised by the complainant against the opposite parties stands disproved. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed. 19. In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No cost. Declared in the Open Forum on this the 29th day of November, 2010. (Sd/-) C. Lathika Bhai, (Member) Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) : (Sd/-) N. Premkumar (Member) : (Sd/-) Appendix: Witness examined on the side of the complainant: W1 : S. Mohankumar. Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant: A1 : Letter dated 30.5.03 issued by the 3rd opposite party to the complainant. A2 : Copy of the registered letter dated 3.7.03 issued by the complainant to the Chief Manager of opposite party. A3 : postal receipt of Ext.A2. A4 : Certificate of posting dated 3.7.03 for the letter sent to the Manager, ICICI Bank, Karunagappally and 3rd opposite party. A5 : Copy of the letter dated 4.8.03 issued by the complainant to the 3rd opposite party. A6 : Copy of the registered letter dated 30.8.03 sent by the complainant to the Collection Manager, ICICI Bank, Thiruvananthapuram. A7 : Postal receipt for Ext.A6. A8 : Registered letter dated 1.10.04 issued by the complainant to the 4th opposite party. A9 & A9(a) : Postal receipts for sending Ext.A8 letter. A10 : Receipt dated 15.11.2004 for the payment of EMI of October and November 2004. A11 : Receipt dated 17.01.2005 for the payment of EMI of January 2005. A12 : Receipt dated 18.02.2005 for the payment of instalment of January and February 2005. A13 & A13(a): Two counterfoil of the D.D’s dated 12.11.05 issued by the Indian Bank, Pathanamthitta. A14 & A14(a): Copy of D.D’s in favour of the opposite party bank. A15 : is the Amortization Schedule of the complainant’s loan account issued by the opposite parties. A16 : Copy of registered letter dated 12.11.05 issued by the complainant to the 2nd opposite party. A17 : Postal receipt of Ext.A16. A18 : Postal receipt for sending Ext.A16 letter to the 4th opposite party. Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil. Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties: B1 : Certification under a State of Account, B2 : Statement of account of the complainant’s loan account. (By Order) Senior Superintendent. Copy to:- (1) S. Mohankumar, Thayyil House, Konni.P.O., Mangaram Muri, Konni Village. (2) The Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd., Pathanamthitta. (3) The Collection Manager (Car Loans), ICICI Bank Ltd.,Kollam. (4) Suresh. G. Nair, Officer (Car Loans), ICICI Bank Ltd., Kollam. (5) The Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd.,Pathanamthitta Branch. (6) The Stock File. | 
