Present: 1. Sri.P.K.Sasi, President.
2. Smt. Sheena.V.V., Member.
3. Sri.M.P.Chandrakumar, Member
30th day of November 2016
C.C. 359/16 filed on 30/6/16
Complainant : Asokan.P.G., S/o.Gangadharan, Panattil House,
Madaikonam, Thrissur.
(By Adv.T.R.Sivan, Thrissur)
Opposite Parties : 1. Kodak Mahindra Prime Ltd., rep. by CEO,
36-38-A, Nariman Bhavan, 227, Nariman
Point, Mumbai.
2. Kodak Mahindra Prime Ltd., rep. by Branch
Manager, 2nd floor, Friends Mall Bldg., Near
Thiruvampadi Temple, Shornur Road,
Thrissur.
O R D E R
By Sri.P.K,.Sasi, President
The case of the complainant is that he has purchased a car by availing a loan of Rs.3,04,280/- from the opposite parties on 20/1/11. Towards loan transaction the complainant has issued 60 post dated cheques as security for repayment. As per the purchase agreement, the complainant has to pay 60 monthly instalments of Rs.6,740/- per month. The opposite parties have collected payment through the account of complainant at South Indian Bank Ltd., Thrissur. Up to February 2014, the opposite parties collected the repayment by means of cheques issued by the complainant. After that, cheque transaction is restricted to CTS cheques instead of ordinary cheques issued by the complainant. Because of that, cheques sent for collection on March and April 2014 were happened to dishonour, even though there was sufficient fund in the account of complainant. Afterwards, the opposite parties agreed to collect the amount through their agent. Accordingly the opposite parties started to collect instalment by cash from the complainant and he has remitted the entire remaining instalments through the collection agent deputed by the opposite parties. After the completion of repayment, the complainant approached the opposite parties for closure of transaction and for getting no objection certificate to submit before Regional Transport Office, for the removal of hire purchase note from the registration certificate of the vehicle. Whereas, the opposite parties were not amenable to issue NOC and demanded to remit outstanding dues of Rs.31,000/-. According to the complainant he has already paid the entire instalment without any default. When the complainant verified the statement of account issued by opposite parties, it was found that the opposite parties were presenting the non CTS cheques regularly, which was collected by them from the complainant at the time of allowing the loan, discarding the payments collected by them through their agent from the complainant. The opposite parties calculated the outstanding dues by adding penal charges for cheques dishonoured on every instalment, on which they have collected cash directly from the complainant from March 2014 to November 2015. Such an illegal act committed by the opposite parties amounts to utter unfair trade practice as well as deficiency in service towards the complainant. While collecting cash payment from the complainant, the opposite parties ought not have been presented non CTS cheques for collection. At last a lawyer notice was issued to the opposite parties on 1/4/16 asking them to issue NOC, duplicate key and the Registration certificate of the vehicle. Accepting the notice, the opposite parties sent reply with false allegations. Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.
2. On receiving complaint, notice was issued to both the opposite parties. Even after accepting notice, the opposite parties neither appeared before the Forum nor filed any version. Hence both the opposite parties set exparte and the case was posted for complainant’s evidence.
3. From the side of complainant, he has appeared before the Forum and submitted proof affidavit, in which he has affirmed and explained all the averments stated in the complaint in detail. He has also produced eight documents, which are marked as Exts.P1 to P8. Ext.P1 is statement of account given by the opposite party, Ext.P2 is pass book issued by South Indian Bank, Ext.P3 series are the receipts issued by opposite parties, Ext.P4 is lawyer notice sent by the opposite party, Ext.P5 is copy of lawyer notice issued by the complainant, Ext.P6 is postal receipt, Ext.P7 is A/D card and Ext.P8 is reply notice received from the opposite party.
4. Since there is no contra evidence available before us, we are inclined to accept the proof affidavit filed by the complainant. If at all there was any contra evidence for the opposite parties, they ought to have been appeared before the Forum and submitted their version.
5. We have gone through the contents of the affidavit as well as the documents produced from the side of complainant. We heard the learned counsel for the complainant. Considering the points discussed hereinabove and the evidence before us, we are of the opinion that the opposite parties have committed unfair trade practice as well as deficiency in service towards the complainant.
6. In the result, we allow this complaint and the opposite parties are directed to issue NOC, duplicate key and RC certificate of the vehicle in dispute along with Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) as cost and compensation to the complainant within one month from receiving copy of this order. Failing which, the complainant is entitled to get 12% interest till realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 30th day of November 2016.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
M.P.Chandrakumar Sheena.V.V. P.K.Sasi, Member Member President.
Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits
Ext.P1 Statement of account
Ext.P2 Pass book
Ext.P3 series Receipts
Ext.P4 Lawyer notice sent by the opposite party
Ext.P5 Copy of lawyer notice issued by the complainant
Ext.P6 Postal receipt
Ext.P7 A/D card
Ext.P8 Reply notice received from the opposite party.
Id/-
President
