Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

79/2011

Asir Danial - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Service Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Adaikala Arokiaraj

02 May 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 14.03.2011

                                                                          Date of Order : 02.05.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                : MEMBER-I

 

C.C. No.79 /2011

DATED THIS WEDNESDAY THE 02^ND DAY OF MAY 2018

                                 

Asir Daniel,

S/o. Mr. Nallamuthu,

No.17, Medavakkam Road,

Sholinganallur,

Chennai – 600 119.                                                .. Complainant.                                                  

 

                                                     ..Versus..

 

1. Mahindra and Mahindra

Financial Services Ltd.,

Rep. by its Manager,

No.15, Arcot Road,

T. Nagar,

Chennai – 600 017.

 

2.  Mahindra and Mahindra

Financing Service Pvt. Ltd.,

Rep. by its Manager,

Plot No.A-10,

Thiruvanmiyur Extension Scheme,

Third Avenue Road,

Thiruvalluvar Nagar,

Thiruvanmiyur,

Chennai – 600 041.                                             ..  Opposite parties.

          

Counsel for complainant         :  Mr. H. Adaikala Arockiaraj &

                                                    another

Counsel for Opposite parties  :  M/s. PASS Associates

 

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking to issue NOC to the complainant, to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and to pay the cost of the complaint.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

The complainant submits that, in order to purchase  a Maruthi Omni car the complainant availed loan for a sum of Rs.2,14,000/- from the opposite party repayable by way of EMI at the rate of Rs.4,540/- for 60 months.  The loan commenced from 25.10.2005 and ends on 25.09.2010.   Further the complainant submits that, all the post dated cheques were duly cleared and the entire 60 EMIs were paid promptly.  The  complainant further submits that, after completion of all monthly installments, the complainant requested the opposite party to issue the No Objection Certificate / Loan Clearance Certificate.  But the opposite party without issuing such certificate claimed an additional amount of Rs.8,682/- including cheque returned charges.  Even after repeated requests and demands, the opposite party compelled the complainant to pay the said amount of Rs.8,182/- after deducting Rs.500/- claimed towards cheque return charges.  Hence the complainant was constrained to issue legal notice dated:10.01.2011 but the opposite parties failed to issue NOC and the complainant was put to severe mental agony.  Hence the complaint is filed.

  2.    The brief averments in the written version filed by the opposite parties is as follows:

The opposite parties specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.  The opposite parties submit that the complainant availed loan for a sum of Rs.2,14,000/- for the purchase of a vehicle viz Maruti Omni as per Loan Agreement No.363207 dated:25.10.2005 which should be repayable by way of EMI at the rate of Rs.4,540/- for 60 months.  The opposite party submits that the complainant has committed delay and default in making the installment contemplated under the loan agreement which attracted the liability of additional financial charges of Rs.1,913/- including the cheque return charges of Rs.500/-.  The opposite parties submit that they are ready and willing to issue NOC and return the original RC to the complainant provided the complainant settle the lawful dues of Rs.1,913/- to these opposite parties.  The opposite parties submit that there was no deficiency in service on their part and the complaint has to be dismissed. 

3.   In order to prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties filed and documents Ex.B1 to Ex.B4 are filed and marked on the side of the opposite parties.

 

4.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled NOC from the opposite party as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost as prayed for?

 

5.  

Heard both sides.  Perused the records namely the complaint, written  version, proof  affidavits, documents, written arguments etc.  Admittedly, the complainant availed car loan from the opposite party. The learned Counsel for the complainant contended that, in order to purchase  a Maruthi Omni car, the complainant availed loan for a sum of Rs.2,14,000/- from the opposite party repayable by way of EMI at the rate of Rs.4,540/- for 60 months.  The loan commenced from 25.10.2005 and ends on 25.09.2010.  Ex.B2 is the loan agreement, Ex.A5 is the copy of RC book and Ex.A6 is the repayment schedule.  Further the complainant contended that, all the post dated cheques were duly cleared and the entire 60 EMIs were paid promptly.  Ex.A3 is the statement of accounts which shows clear payment of all the installments.  The  learned Counsel for the complainant further contended that, after completion of all monthly installments, the complainant requested the opposite party to issue No Objection Certificate / Loan Clearance Certificate.  But the opposite party without issuing such certificate claimed an additional amount of Rs.8,682/- including cheque returned charges.  Even after repeated requests and demands, the opposite party compelled the complainant to pay the said amount of Rs.8,182/- deducting Rs.500/- claimed towards cheque return charges.  Since the claim of the opposite party is prima facie wrong, the complainant was constrained to issue legal notice for which, the opposite party issued a reply  as per Ex.B4 stated as follows:

“At the outset we express our grief in receiving this notice as your client is one of our pioneer customer and we have good healthy relationship.  We in advertently arrived a calculation and we apologizes ourselves for the same.  As per the record AFC and cheque return charges are the due amount.  For further clarifications we hereby request your client to visit our Branch Office or the undersigned person in Regional Office regarding to the issues stated in the legal notice” proves the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.  Further the contention of the complainant is that, as per Ex.A3 & Ex.A6, it is apparently clear that without any default all the EMIs were released by depositing the post dated cheques issued by the complainant.  There shall be no amount due to the opposite party.  The additional interest charges of Rs.5,827/- and AFC due Rs.2,355/- is imaginary and not explained by the opposite party.  The complainant is claiming Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation with No Objection Certificate / Loan Clearance Certificate. 

6.     The learned Counsel for the opposite party contended that the complainant approached this Hon’ble Forum by suppressing the existence of loan agreement contained in the arbitration clause.  But the law is well settled that the arbitration proceedings shall not be a bar to the consumer proceedings. Further the contention of opposite party is that the complainant has committed delay and default in payment of installments contemplated under the loan agreement which attracted the liability of additional financial charges of Rs.1,913/- including the cheque return charges of Rs.500/-.   But admittedly, the opposite party received 60 post dated cheques for 60 monthly installments while sanctioning the loan itself proves that there shall not be any delay in payment.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties shall issue the No Objection Certificate / Loan Clearance Certificate with  a compensation of Rs.20,000/- with cost of Rs.5,000/-.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.  The  opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally directed to issue ‘No Objection with clearance Certificate’ to the complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.

The above  amounts shall be payable  within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.  

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 02^nd  day of May 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1	10.01.2011	Copy of legal notice to the opposite parties
Ex.A2		Copy of return RPAD cover
Ex.A3	16.10.2010	Copy of statement of accounts
Ex.A4	28.10.2008	Copy of Life time Tax MVT Act
Ex.A5		Copy of RC Book vide serial No.1608740
Ex.A6	01.12.2005	Copy of repayment scheduled for vehicle receipts.

 

OPPOSITE  PARTIES SIDE DOCUMENTS:  

Ex.B1	09.02.2011	Copy of Power of Attorney
Ex.B2	25.10.2005	Copy of Loan Agreement
Ex.B3	13.03.2013	Copy of statement of accounts
Ex.B4	08.03.2011	Copy of reply notice

 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                       PRESIDENT