D.o.F:17/9/11
D.o.O:19/7/12
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.No.234 /2011
Dated this, the 19th day of July 2012
PRESENT
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
SMT.RAMADEVI.P : MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
T.K.Rajani, W/o Prasad,
Sreevalsam, Thadiyanvalappu, : Complainant
Po.Kanhiradukkam,Hosdurg,Kasaragod
(in person)
1.Manager,ICICI Bank,
M.G.Road, Ernakulam ,Cochin,
Ernakumal Dt.
2. Manager, Magma Fincorp Limited,
Regd office Magma House, : Opposite parties
24, Park street, Kolkata, 700016.
3. Authorised Signatory,
Magma No.40, Foundation House, 4th Floor,
2nd main CKC Garden, Mission Road, Bangalore
560027.
( Ops 2&3Adv. K.M.Ballukuraya, Kasaragod)
ORDER
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
Complainant availed a loan of ` 850,000/- from Ist opposite party bank on 6/9/06. As per the terms of agreement he ought to have been repaid 1060380/- within 10/7/11 in 59/- equal instalments. Later he came to know that his account is transferred to Megma Finance Corp on 15/9/2010. Thereafter he remitted instalment to Megma Finance Corp. Though the total amount to be repaid was ` 1060380/- he repaid ` 1084238/- ie ` 23858/- in excess. But after remitting the said amount when he demanded the loan clearance certificate, pposite parties further demanded ` 108048/-. According to her she is not liable to pay the said amount and opposite parties are liable to refund the excess amount paid. Hence the complaint.
Inspite of receipt of notice Ist opposite party neither appeared before the forum nor filed version. Opposite parties 2&3 filed a joint version.
According to opposite parties 2&3 complainant has repaid `1049534/-. But she has not paid anything in excess. Complainant is liable to pay a further sum of ` 119950.86 towards the delayed payment charges and cheque bouncing charges etc. Therefore she is not entitled to get the loan clearance certificate.
3. After filing version both the parties heard. During enquiry the complainant submitted that one cheque issued by her is bounced. The opposite party also could not establish in what way the complainant further liable to pay `119950/-. However on going through Ext.A4 receipts it is seen that complainant has remitted all the instalments in time. Hence she is not liable to pay the amount claimed by opposite party. More over opposite parties are also failed to submit their statement of account explaining how the complainant is liable to pay the amount as claimed by them. But during enquiry the complainant has fairly conceded that she is ready to pay `15000/- towards the settlement of the issue and thereby getting the no objection certificate for the cancellation of HP endorsement from the RC of her vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-60/1672.
Therefore the complaint is allowed and complainant is directed to remit `15000/- to opposite parties 2&3 within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Opposite parties 2&3 shall issue No Objection Certificate and HP Termination letter within 30 days from the date of receipt of the said amount. Failing which on application by the complainant along with the evidence of payment of `15000/- to opposite parties 2&3, necessary direction will be issued to the concerned Registering Authority to cancel the HP endorsement favouring the Ist opposite
party in respect of the vehicle bearing Reg No.KL 60/1672. In that case opposite parties 2&3 shall be further liable to pay `2000/-as cost of proceedings to the complainant.
Exts:
A1-23/7/11- request issued by complainant to OP.1
A2-Reply of Ext.A1
A3-Copy of repayment schedule
A4-series- payment receipts
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
eva
