Kerala

Malappuram

CC/09/183

M.K MUJEEB - Complainant(s)

Versus

KHICHA ESTATES AND FINANCE - Opp.Party(s)

01 Oct 2009

ORDER


CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
consumer case(CC) No. CC/09/183

M.K MUJEEB
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

JOINT RTO TIRUR
KHICHA ESTATES AND FINANCE
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. AYISHAKUTTY. E 2. C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI 3. MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,


 

1. Complainant availed loan of Rs.2,20,000/- from opposite party for the purchase of TATA SUMO vehicle, for earning his livelihood by means of self employment. The total amount to be repaid was Rs.3,00,000/- in 30 instalments. Complainant repaid the entire loan. When complainant approached first opposite party and requested for hire purchase termination letter, first opposite party demanded Rs.29,000/- as additional hire charges and other fees. Complainant is not liable to pay any further amount. Complainant alleges deficiency in service. Hence this complaint.

2. Notice issued to both opposite parties were served. First opposite party did not file any version and remained absent. First opposite party was set exparte on 31-8-2009. Second opposite party filed version stating that the dispute is a matter of finance between complainant and opposite parties.

3. Evidence consists of the proof affidavit filed by complainant and Exts.A1 and A2 receipts marked for the complainant. There is no evidence adduced on behalf of opposite parties. Complainant has reiterated the statement in the affidavit. The receipts show that complainant has repaid entire loan. Claim proved. The non-issuance of hire purchase termination letter even after fully repaying the loan is deficiency in service. We find first opposite party deficient in service.

4. In the result we allow the complaint and order that first opposite party shall issue hire purchase termination letter to the complainant within one month from date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which on application by complainant a copy of this order will be communicated tot he second opposite party who on receiving copy of the order shall cancel the finance endorsement in Registration certificate, of the vehicle KL-09/P2368. There is no order as to costs.

    Dated this 1st day of October, 2009.


 


 

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT


 


 

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

APPENDIX


 


 

Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 and A2

Ext.A1 : Payment chart received from first opposite party to complainant.

Ext.A2 (series) : Receipts (30 Nos.) received from first opposite party to complainant.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil


 


 

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT


 


 

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER


 


 


 




......................AYISHAKUTTY. E
......................C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI
......................MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN