Kerala

Thiruvananthapuram

CC/18/413

Sathyaseelan V - Complainant(s)

Versus

Magma Fin crop - Opp.Party(s)

27 Feb 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

PRESENT

 

               SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN           : PRESIDENT

          SMT.PREETHA G NAIR     : MEMBER

          SRI.VIJU.V.R                        : MEMBER

CC.NO.413/2018 (Filed on : 15/11/2018)

ORDER DATED : 27/02/2023

COMPLAINANTS

1. Sathyaseelan.V

Sree Nilayam,

Attinkuzhi, Kazhakkuttam.P.O

Thiruvananthapuram – 695582

2. Indiraseelan,

W/o. Sathyaseelan.V

Sree Nilayam,

Attinkuzhi, Kazhakkuttam.P.O

Thiruvananthapuram – 695582

(By Adv.Rajesh kumar.K)

565.  

OPPOSITE PARTIES

1. Magma Fincorp Limited,

Magma House,

24, Park Street,

Kolkatta, Pin – 700016

2. The Senior Manager,

Magma Fincorp Limited,

Haji.M. Bava Sahib Commercial Complex,

TC No.25/2890(1), Ambujavilasom Road,

Thiruvananthapuram - 695001

     (By Adv.Narayan.R)

ORDER

SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN      : PRESIDENT

1. This complaint filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 and stood over to this date for consideration and this Commission passed the following order.

2.   This is a complaint filed by the complainants against the opposite parties alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. After admitting the complaint notice was issued to the opposite parties. The opposite parties entered appearance and filed written version denying the allegations raised by the complainants. Complainants filed proof affidavit and Exts.P1 to P14 were marked. Opposite parties also filed proof affidavit and Exts.B1 to B5 were marked. Both complainants and opposite parties filed argument notes and the matter was posted to 25/03/2023 for pronouncing orders.

3. Meanwhile the complainant filed IA.67/23 to advance the case from 25/03/2023 to this date on the ground that the dispute between the complainants and the opposite parties were settled out of court and hence the complainants are not willing to further proceed with this complaint. The opposite parties not filed any objection and hence the case was advanced from 25/03/2023 to this date for recording settlement. When the case came up for consideration today the complainant filed a settlement memo stating that the opposite parties have agreed to issue clearance certificate and no objection certificate in respect of both the vehicle ie KL 22-E-2991 and KL 22-E-3058 for the purpose of lifting the hypothecation through RTO office. Today the complainants submitted that they have received no objection certificate in respect of KL 22-E-2991 and KL 22-E-3058 from the opposite parties and hence they are not willing to proceed with this complaint. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties to the proceedings we find that this is a fit case to be dismissed as settled. The settlement memo field by the complainant is accepted and recorded.

              In the result, the complaint is dismissed as settled.

       A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

        Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission, this the 27^th day of February 2023.

 

 

                                                                             Sd/-

P.V.JAYARAJAN    : PRESIDENT

 

                                                                                      Sd/-

        PREETHA G NAIR      : MEMBER

                                                                                            

                                                                                                Sd/-

VIJU.V.R    : MEMBER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Be/