By: Miss. R.K.Madanavally, Member
Facts in brief:-
The complainant is the owner of the vehicle bearing Reg: No.KL-10-X-2220. The vehicle was purchased for the purpose of his lively hood with the financial assistance of the opposite party No1. On 5-11-10, the payment chart was issued to the complainant by opposite party, for a total amount of Rs.2,81,300/-. The last installment in the payment chart falls on April 2013.
The complainant had remitted several installments towards opposite party, and on 22-12-12, the opposite party No1 had issued the Receipt chart by which an amount of Rs.2,08,978/- was paid and the balance payable was Rs. 72,322/-. Because of the financial stringency, the complainant requested the opposite party No1 to reschedule the loan at a lesser rate and on 10-1-13, he had made a payment of Rs.12500/- and again requested to re-schedule the loan. The opposite party No1 had collected several signatures of the complainant and the complainant, had put the signature on the belief that it was to reschedule the loan. But the opposite party No.1 issued a letter dated 28/3/13 showing higher repayment. According to the complainant, the balance amount towards the opposite party No.1 will be Rs.59822/- instead, the opposite party No.1 had calculated an amount of Rs.1,81,877/-.
One of the officers of opposite party No1, Mr. Rajesh gave a hand written calculation for an amount of Rs. 1,01,858/-. As per the information given by the complainant's friend, the opposite party No1 had issued another vehicle loan of Rs.1,45000/- without the knowledge of the complainant. It is an unfair trade practice and the complainant is praying for cancelling the above document dated 28/3/13, Hence this complaint.
The opposite party No1 appeared and filed the detailed verssion by denying the major allegations/ averements in the complaint. The opposite party No.1 had taken the contensions that the complainant is not consumer, this Forum has no jurisdiction to try the case and the complaint is not maintainable before this Forum etc. The availing of the loan by the complainant was admitted by the opposite party No1. According to the opposite party No1, the complainant was a chronic defaulter and the insurance amount was not paid by the complainant in proper time. So the opposite party No.1 had paid an amount of Rs.42028/- towards the insurance amount. Further, an amount of Rs. 37529 was the over due compensation. As on 22-3-13, the actual due amount towards the company is 1,33550/-. The requests made by the complainant for re-scheduling the loan was admitted by opposite party No1.
The averement of the complainant that, he is only liable to pay an amount of Rs.59822/- was denied by the opposite party No1. They submitted that they can very well exercise its lean and ownership over the vehicle unless and until the entire dues has been discharged. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part and the complaint is to be dismissed.
Now the points arises for our considration here in are;
1) Whether the opposite parties are deficient in their service?
2) If so relief and cost?
Point No1 and 2.
Since the Jurisdiction and maintainability was not much challenged by the opposite party No1, we are not discussing these matters. The documents filed by the complainant were marked as Ext A1 to A7 and the documents of opposite party is marked as Ext. B1 to B4. As per Ext. B3, the complainant had given consent to opposite party No1 for rescheduling the loan for an amount of Rs.1,45,000/- dated 22.3.10. The Ext. B1, the settlement break up is shown an amount of Rs. 1,39685/-. The complainant is not acepting the Ext. B3 consent letter. On perusal of the documents it is under stood that Ext. A3 is the result of Ext. B3.
Both the complainant and opposite party No1 submitted that the complainant had suffered much financial stringency. That is why the complainant requested to re-schedule the loan. The complainant submitted a calculation statement which was calculated by one of the officers of opposite party No1. The opposite party No1 vehemently opposed the manuscript of Mr. Rajesh. We are also not in a position to accept the above calculation since it is not proved.
As per Ext B4, agreement the complainant is bound to pay the loan amount. But how much amount will pay as balances towards opposite party No2. It is evident that the complainant had made default in paying the loan amount. According to his own calculation, Rs.59822/- is remaining as balance. The amount prepared by the opposite party No1 and complainant shows huge difference.
The complainant had already paid Rs. 2,08978/- as on 22.12.12. How ever he has to pay the balance amount towards opposite party. This Fourm is not entertaining the practice of demanding over interest and interest upon interest etc by the Finance agencies like opposite party No1. At the same time they are entitle to get their loan amount.
In the light of the above discussion we feel that an exorbitant rate of interest and interest upon interest etc cannot be allowed. So in order to meet the ends of Justice, the complainant has to pay Rs.50,000/- to the opposite party apart from the amount already admitted by the complainant ie Rs. 59,822 since the complainant has commited default in repayment of the loan amount in time.
In the result, we order that the complainant shall pay Rs.59,822 + 50,000/- to the opposite partyNo1 with in three weeks from today and after accepting the said amount, the opposite party No1 shall return all the vehicle documents available with opposite party and to issue HP Termination letter and NOC , in respect of the vehicle No. KL10X 2220. In case the opposite party not issue the above said NOC, the opposite party No2 shall cancel HP edndorsement in the R.C. No order us to cost and compensation.
Dated this 13th day of February, 2015
K.MOHAMMED ALI , PRESIDENT
R.K.MADANAVALLY , MEMBER MINI MATHEW, MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A5
Ext.A1 : Payment chart dated, 29/09/2010
Ext.A2 : Receipts chart dated, 22/12/2012
Ext A3 : Letter dated 28/03/2013
Ext A4 : Hand written copy by Mr. Rajesh.
Ext A5 : Temporary Receipts issued by 1st opposite party
Ext A6 : Payment receipt dated 10/01/2013
Ext A7 : Lawyer notice issued By Adv. Dinesh.O.K to the complainant
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Ext. B1 to B4
Ext.B1 : Copy of the ledger extract
Ext.B2 : Insurance Certificate.
Ext.B3 : Letter issued by the complainant dated 22/3/10 to the opposite party No1
Ext.B4 : Loan cum Hypothecation Agreement.
K.MOHAMMED ALI , PRESIDENT
R.K.MADANAVALLY , MEMBER
MINI MATHEW, MEMBER
