BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM (UNDER CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986), MEDAK AT SANGAREDDY
Present: Sri P.V.Subrahmanyam, B.A.,B.L., PRESIDENT
Sri Mekala Narsimha Reddy, M.A.,LL.B.,
P.G.D.C.P.L. Male Member
Smt. Meena Ramanathan, B.Com.,
Lady Member
Friday the 4th day of June, 2010
CC.No.29 of 2009
Between:
Matam Vaijinath S/o Late Chen Basaiah,
Aged 54 years, Occ: Govt. Employee,
R/o Vidyanagar, Plot No. 63, Pothireddypally,
Sangareddy, Medak District. ….. Complainant
And
1. M.G.B. Motors & Auto Agencies Pvt. Ltd.,
Near TTD Kalyanamandapam, Main Road,
Sangareddy, Medak Dist.
2. M/s Bajaj Auto Finance,
Spencer Super Market, Tarnaka, Hyderabad.
(Amended as per I.A. No. 61 of 2009 on 09.10.2009)
....Opposite parties
This case came up for final hearing before us on 21.05.2010 in the presence of Sri. M. Goverdhan Rao, Advocate for complainant and Sri. C. Sreenivas, Advocate for opposite party No. 1and Sri. T. Sathyanarayana, Advocate for opposite party No.2, upon hearing the arguments of both sides, on perusing the record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this forum delivered the following
O R D E R
(Per Smt. Meena Ramanathan, Lady Member)
This complaint is filed Under Section 12 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to direct the opposite parties to hand over the R.C. Book and second key of the purchase vehicle i.e. pulsar bearing Registration No. AP-23-H-7807.
1. The complainant purchased a vehicle i.e. PULSAR-50-ES-DTS-I and its registration No. AP-23-H-7807 from opposite party No. 1 on 31.07.2005 for a sum of Rs. 62,695/- which includes incidental charges. The complainant paid Rs. 35,600/- in cash and received a receipt bearing No. 190, dated 31.07.2005. For the balance amount finance was taken from Opposite party No. 2 as per the opposite party No. 1 instructions.
He agreed to pay twelve monthly installments of Rs.2,500/-. He issued blank cheques bearing No. 782481 to 182492. Accordingly the loan amount of Rs. 30,000/- was paid. There is no balance due.
The complainant further submit that having cleared the balance amount he approached opposite party No. 1 for the R.C.Book and second key of the vehicle. But opposite party No. 1 refuses to do the same. He is been facing a lot of trouble in the using the vehicle without an R.C. Book. Hence the complaint.
2. The complaint is resisted by the opposite party No. 1 by filing a counter to the follows effect:
The opposite party No. 1 submit that the above complaint is neither maintainable under law nor on facts given. The opposite party sold the PULSAR-150-ES-DTS-I which was financed by opposite party No. 2. Opposite party No. 2 is a separate entity, and is not connected to opposite party No. 1. Therefore opposite party No. 2 is the necessary party to answer the complainant. Opposite party No. 1 claims that he does not have any knowledge regarding the blank cheques issued by the complainant. He did not give any instructions to take finance from opposite party No. 2. He is neither concern with the cheques nor with the balance due to opposite party No. 2.
When any vehicle is delivered to the purchaser opposite party No. 1 does not keep any material or keys belonging to that particular vehicle. Likewise in this case also they did not retain any thing. The R.C. Book is not with this party. It may be kept with opposite party No. 2 as they have financed the vehicle. They have no connection with opposite party No. 2.
Therefore opposite party No. 1 clearly states that they have not caused any inconvience to the complainant nor is there any deficiency of service. In view of the above they pray that the complaint is dismissed by imposing a cost of Rs.10,000/-.
3. The complaint is resisted by the opposite party No. 1 by filing a counter to the follows effect:
The opposite party No.2 to agrees that the entered into a loan agreement No. 400111071 on 04/08/2005 to provide finance of Rs.30,000/- with the complainant for the purchase of PULSAR Vehicle -150-ES-DTS-I. Twelve monthly installments of Rs.2,500/- was agreed on.
Punctual payment of each installment is the essence of a finance agreement and the complainant agreed upon the same by signing the loan agreement. He assured opposite party No. 2 that the installment cheque will be honoured on the fourth of the every month. Opposite party No. 2 states that the complainant has failed to pay the monthly installment from December, 2008. As on 04.11.2009 an amount of Rs.5,000/- was due and a penal interest of Rs.4,550/-. Opposite party No. 2 is relying on the statement of account dated 04.11.2009 which the complainant has filed.
It is not correct to say that opposite party No. 2 did not present the cheques deposited with them for the agreed monthly installments. The complainant fail to make the prompt payments. This is not been made clear by the complainant. Unless the opposite party No. 2 receives the full amount due by the complainant they are not in a position to issue R.C.Book and no dues certificate. This was explained by them to the complainant.
It is further stated that the complainant has not approached this Hon’ble forum with clean hands and has filed the present complaint with an intention to harass. Hence they pray that the complaint is dismiss along with heavy cost. Also to direct the complainant to pay an amount of Rs.9,550/-.
4. Evidence affidavits of both parties filed. In order to prove the averments in the respective pleadings Exs. A1 to A3 are marked on behalf of the complainant. Ex. B1 is marked on behalf of opposite party No. 2. Written argument filed by the complainant and opposite party No. 2. Oral arguments of both parties are heard. Perused the records.
The point for consideration is whether the payment of installments towards the loan amount is cleared and to hand over the R.C.Book and second key to the complainant?
Point:
We have gone through the affidavits and arguments of both the parties and concluded that there is a dispute regarding the payment of installment between the complainant and opposite parties.
The complainant states that he paid an initial amount of Rs.35,600/- to opposite party No. 1 in cash and for the balance amount he took a loan from opposite party No. 2 for a sum of Rs.30,000/-. This loan amount was to be repaid in 12 equal installments of Rs.2,500/- per month. For the said installment the complainant issued blank cheques bearing No. 782481 to 182492.
The installments was paid. The complainant approached opposite party No. 1 for the R.C. Book and second key, which was not handed over to him. They refused saying that it was not with them but with the financiers.
The opposite party No. 2 alleged that the complainant had to pay a some of Rs.5,000/- plus penal interest of Rs.4,550/-. This allegation is refuted by the complainant, saying he has to pay only one installment. Hence the complaint is allowed.
The opposite party No. 1 states that the entire amount was paid for the vehicle – partly through the financier. They are not concerned with the issuance of the blank cheques has submitted by the complainant. They are not in any way connected with the balance due to the opposite party NO. 2. Once the vehicle has been delivered they do not retain the R.C. Book or the key. It may be kept with the financier.
The opposite party No. 2 clearly states that the complainant entered into a loan agreement No. 400111071 on 04.08.2005 with them and that he avail an amount of Rs.30,000/- for the purchase of the said vehicle. The monthly installments to be paid his Rs.2,500/- p.m. and the contract period was for 12 months.
They claim that the complainant neglected to make prompt payments from December, 2008 and on 04.11.2009 an amount of Rs.5,000/- was due from the complainant and a penal interest of Rs.4,550/-. They also clearly states that the complainant was aware of the terms and conditions but failed to comply. Unless and until he clears the dues the opposite party No. 2 cannot issue the R.C. Book and Key.
The above facts of the case are substantiated by the evidence documents Exs. A1 to A3.
Ex.A1 is the receipt from opposite party No. 1 for payment of Rs.35,600/-.
Ex.A2 is the receipt from opposite party No. 1 for full payment of the vehicle.
Ex.A3 is the bank statement showing that there is a short fall in the payment of installments.
The complainant has not been able to prove the allegation of opposite party No. 2.
Ex.B1 – the loan agreement filed by opposite party NO. 2 clearly shows that there is a due of Rs.5,000/- dated upto 31.12.2008. This has not been disproved by the complainant.
As such the above circumstances, the complainant has not proved any of the allegations against opposite party Nos. 1 and 2. Opposite party No. 1 is not party to the dispute. Hence the complaint and should pay the due amount to opposite party No. 2, to collect the R.C. Book. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed without costs. The point is answered against the complainant.
In the result the complaint is dismissed, without costs.
Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum this 04th day of June, 2010.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MALE MEMBER LADY MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witness examined
For the complainant : For the opposite parties:
-Nil- -Nil-
DOCUMENTS MARKED
For the complainant : For the opposite parties:
Ex.A1/dt.31.07.2005 – Cash receipt. | Ex.B1/dt.04.11.2009 – Account statement of opposite party No.2 |
Ex.A2/dt.25.07.2005 – Proforma Invoice. | |
Ex.A3/dt.27.12.2006 – Bank Statement. | |
Sd/-
LADY MEMBER
Copy to
The Complainant
The Opposite parties
Spare copy copy delivered to the Complainant/
Opp.Parties On __________
Dis.No. /2010, dt.
