BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

C.C. No. 271/2010 Filed on 27.08.2010

Dated : 28.02.2011

Complainants:

1. P. Abdul Rahiman, S/o Peerukkannu, residing at Thannipara Shameem Manzil, Pezhumoodu, Kuttichal P.O, Kattakkada, Thiruvananthapuram.

    

2. A.S. Shameem, S/o Abdul Rahiman, residing at ..do..

(By adv. S. Williams)

Opposite parties :

1. Magma Fincorp Ltd., Magma House, 24 Park Street, Kolkatta-700 016.

    

Addl. Opposite party:

2. Shrachi Infrastructure Finance Ltd., T.C 23/678(3), Temple View Tower, Kizhakkenada, Mahadeva Temple, Kochar Road, Thiruvananthapuram.

This O.P having been heard on 24.02.2011, the Forum on 28.02.2011 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. BEENAKUMARI.A: MEMBER

Brief facts of the case are as follows: The 1^st complainant purchased one Maruthi Car viz No. KL-16 9727 in 2003. The 1^st opposite party financed the vehicle. The 2^nd complainant stood as guarantor. As per the terms of the agreement between the complainant with the 1^st opposite party the repayment schedule is fixed to 47 months of which Rs. 5,049/- for 30 months and Rs. 4,349/- for the remaining 17 months. As per the terms of the Hire Purchase Agreement the 1^st complainant repaid Rs. 2,25,557/- instead of Rs. 2,25,404/- to be paid. But to the surprise of the 1^st complainant the opposite party as per its notice dated 03.02.2010 instructed to pay Rs. 1,49,472.37 within 7 days from the receipt of the said notice. The complainant replied the notice on 21.03.2010 and made it very clear that the amount due to the opposite party was paid on time in accordance with the terms of the Hire Purchase Agreement. But on 06.08.2010 the opposite party again issued letter whereby instructed the complainant to pay Rs. 1,78,643.43 within 7 days from the receipt of the said notice. The opposite party further threatened that on failure of the remittance of the amount, they will proceed to recover the vehicle. The complainant states that the act of the opposite party amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service. Hence this complaint.

The opposite parties in this case accepted notice from this Forum, but not turned up to contest the case. Hence the opposite parties remained exparte. The complainant has filed proof affidavit and examined him as PW1. He has produced 5 documents which were marked as Exts. P1 to P5.

Points to be ascertained:

1. Whether there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice from the side of opposite parties?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs and costs?

Points (i) & (ii):- The 1^st complainant purchased car in 2003 financed by the opposite parties, that as per the terms of the Hire Purchase Agreement complainant has to pay Rs. 2,25,404/- as total installment amount in 47 months, that complainant had paid Rs. 2,25,557/- instead of Rs. 2,25,404/-. But as per notice dated 03.02.2010 the opposite party instructed the 1^st complainant to pay Rs. 1,49,472.37 within 7 days from the receipt of the said notice. The notice dated 03.02.2010 is produced herewith and marked as Ext. P1. As per this notice the payment made by the complainant is agreed by the opposite party. Ext. P2 is the copy of reply notice dated 21.03.2010 issued by the complainant to the opposite party. But the opposite party again demanded the amount through notice dated 06.08.2010, that notice is marked as Ext. P3. Ext. P5 is the installment schedule. As per this document total amount to be paid is Rs. 2,25,403/-, total installment is seen as 47 and the due date of last installment is shown as 10.08.2007. As per Ext. P1 the complainant has paid Rs. 2,25,557/-. In this case the complainant did not produce any evidence to show that when the account was closed. As per Ext. P5 document the last remittance was on 26.12.2007. In this case the opposite parties never turned up to contest the case. Hence the affidavit filed by the complainant stands unchallenged. On the basis of the affidavit and other documents produced by the complainant, we allow the complaint and we find that the opposite parties are not entitled to any amount from the complainants.

In the result, the opposite parties are directed to stop all further proceedings against the complainants on account of the fulfillment of Hire Purchase Agreement entered into with the complainants.

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 Forum, this the 28^th day of February 2011.

BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

jb

C.C. No. 271/2010

APPENDIX

I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :

PW1 - P. Abdul Rahiman

II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :

P1 - Copy of the notice dated 03.02.2010

P2 - Copy of reply notice dated 21.03.2010 issued by the

complainant to the opposite party.

P3 - Copy of notice dated 06.08.2010

P4 - Copy of acknowledgement cards.

P5 - Copy of installment schedule.

III OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESS :

NIL

IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS :

NIL

PRESIDENT

jb