BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

Date of filing : 18/05/2011

Date of Order : 30/04/2012

Present :-

Shri. A. Rajesh, President.

Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.

Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

C.C. No. 256/2011

Between

And

O R D E R

A. Rajesh, President.

1. The case of the complainant is as follows :-

The complainant is the registered owner of the Maruthi Wagon R. Car bearing Registration No. KL-04-N 7008. The complainant availed a loan of Rs. 3 lakhs from the 1^st opposite party as per loan agreement dated 27-09-2003 which was repayable in 60 equal instalments of Rs. 6,090/- each. The complainant paid the entire amount as agreed. A duplicate key of the vehicle was deposited with the 1^st opposite party by the 2^nd opposite party. Accordingly, after the payment of the instalments the complainant requested the 1^st opposite party to issue the N.O.C to release the hire purchase endorsement in the R.C. Book and to hand over the spare key, but they did not do so. The facts being so, the 1^st opposite party caused to issue a legal notice to pay Rs. 2,278/- which was properly replied to and requested to furnish details of the dues if any, but there was no response. Therefore on two occasions, the complainant received legal notices issued by the 1^st opposite party in which the complainant was called upon to pay Rs. 1,822/-. Thus, the complainant is before us seeking direction against the opposite parties :-

1. To direct the 1^st opposite party to issue the N.O.C and to direct the opposite parties to hand over the spare key of the vehicle.

2. To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation and Rs. 2,000/- towards costs of the proceedings.

2. The version of the 1^st opposite party :-

The complainant had to repay the loan in 60 monthly instalments of Rs. 6,090/- each. As per the loan agreement, the EMI was agreed to be remitted on 15^th day of every month and for defaults, the complainant would be liable for cheque bouncing charges of Rs. 500/- over due charges due to the non-payment and late payment of EMI's and other charges. The complainant had defaulted payment of 3 EMI's. As per the statement of accounts of the complainant as on August 2011, an amount of Rs. 1,843.25 is payable to the 1^st opposite party in the loan account. The 1^st opposite party has not collected the spare key of the vehicle of the complainant. The 1^st opposite party has no objection in issuing the N.O.C to the complainant provided she pays the outstanding dues.

3. The defense of the 2^nd opposite party :-

The complainant had purchased a Maruti Wagon R. car from the 2^nd opposite party. The opposite party had handed over 2 keys to the complainant. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the 2^nd opposite party.

4. The complainant was examined as PW1and Exts. A1 to A11 were marked on her side. Ext. B1 was marked on the side of the 1^st opposite party. Neither oral not documentary evidence was adduced by the 2^nd opposite party. Heard the complainant who appeared in person and the counsel for the opposite parties.

5. The points that arose for consideration are as follows :

1. Whether the 1^st opposite party is liable to issue No Objection Certificate to the complainant?

2. Whether the opposite parties are liable to hand over the spare key of the vehicle to the complainant?

3. Whether the complainant is entitled to get compensation and costs of the proceedings from the opposite parties?

6. Point No. i. :- The complainant contends that she has remitted the entire loan amount which she had availed from the 1^st opposite party and she is entitled to get the N.O.C from the 1^st opposite party to release the hypothecation entered in the R.C. Book. The 1^st opposite party maintains that an amount of Rs. 1,822/- is still outstanding in the loan account. But nothing is before us to substantiate the same. In short, legally the complainant is not liable to pay any more amount to the complainant in her loan account. During the proceedings in this Forum on 16-03-2012, the 1^st opposite party issued the no objection certificate to the complainant to release the hire purchase endorsement in the R.C. Book. The complainant duly accepted the same. Therefore, further discussion on this part is not at all warranted having the dispute being squarely met.

7. Point No. ii. :- The complainant purchased the vehicle from the 2^nd opposite party with the financial assistance of the 1^st opposite party. According to the complainant, the 2^nd opposite party returned a spare key and handed over the same to the 1^st opposite party, since the 1^st opposite party granted loan to purchase the vehicle. Both the opposite parties vehemently disputed the acceptance of the spare key from the complainant. Nothing is in black and white to prove that either of the opposite parties collected the spare key from the complainant neither has the complainant produced evidence for the same. In the absence of such evidence, we are not to fasten the liability on the opposite parties to issue the spare key to the complainant which they are not in possession thereof as unquestionable.

8. Point No. iii. :- The complainant caused Exts. A6 to A9 letters to the 1^st opposite party before approaching this Forum. The 1^st opposite party failed to respond to the above notices for reasons of their own not stated. The above conduct of the 1^st opposite party amounts to deficiency in service, which prompted the complainant to knock at the doors of this Forum. Had the 1^st opposite party issued the NOC even in the first instance, this complaint would not have arisen and the time of this Forum could have been saved which could have been put to better use. The above seemingly and audacious and high handed act on the part of the 1^st opposite party cannot be countenanced, which calls for compensation and costs of the proceedings. We allow the same, since the grievances of the complainant have been more than sufficiently met, we do not consider award of compensation which might go to wrong the opposite parties.

9. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and direct that the 1^st opposite party shall pay a sum of Rs. 2,000/- to the complainant for the reasons stated above.

The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 12% p.a. till realisation.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30^th day of April 2012.

Sd/- A. Rajesh, President.

Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member.

Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

Forwarded/By Order,

Senior Superintendent.

A P P E N D I X

Complainant's Exhibits :-

Opposite party's Exhibits :-

=========