IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA,
Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2011.
Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President).
Sri. N. Premkumar (Member)
C.C. No. 114/2010 (Filed on 11.08.2010)
Between:
Jameskutty Thomas,
Madappallil Grace Villa,
Elanthoor Village,
Kozhencherry Taluk.
(By Adv. Sherin. M. Thomas) …. Complainant.
And:
1. The Manager,
IndusInd Bank,
Chandrima Building,
Near Cross Junction,
Thiruvalla – 689 101.
2. The Manager,
IndusInd Bank,
Regd. Office, 2401,
Gen. Thimmaya Road (East Street),
Contonement, Pune – 411 001.
3. The Manager,
IndusInd Bank,
Corporate Office (Retail),
Sudarsan Buildings, 92 (Old No.86),
Chamiers Road,
Chennai – 600 018.
(By Adv. M. Manoj Kumar) …. Opposite parties.
ORDER
Sri. N. Premkumar (Member):
The complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite parties for getting a relief from the Forum.
2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows: The complainant availed a loan of ` 7,00,000 from the first opposite party on 30.11.2005 for purchasing ALPSG (ALPASSR) KL-03N/6474 vehicle. As per the terms and conditions, complainant has to repay the said loan from 21.11.2005 to 21.08.2008 period by 33 instalments including interest. The repayment amount is ` 8,11,060. As per direction of opposite parties, complainant given 30 cheque leaves, but they sent for collection more than one cheque per month. Therefore, complainant taken back the cheque leaves and paid monthly instalment directly. After clearing the entire dues, complainant approached the first opposite party on 21.08.2008 for getting clearance certificate. Instead of issuing the same, they ridiculed him and also pressed for additional huge amount. Hence this complaint for getting clearance certificate, excess amount remitted with compensation and cost.
3. Opposite parties entered appearance and filed version stating that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. According to them, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this case. There is an agreement with Arbitration Clause between the parties and the transaction took place between the parties based on the said agreement.
4. Opposite parties admitted the sanction of the loan, issuance of the loan amount, acceptance of the same, and non-issuance of the clearance certificate etc. But denied the complainant’s claim of full payment of the loan amount. As on 22.10.2010 an amount of ` 17,832 is pending from the complainant. The loan was sanctioned with a condition to repay the amount within 34 instalments. The instalment amount of every month is ` 24,000 and has to be remitted on or before 21st day of every month. Otherwise the complainant has to remit the additional finance charges also. Complainant is not regular in remitting the monthly instalment. He made certain defaults for which he has to pay additional finance charges to the bank, as per the directions and guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India. Until and unless the additional finance charges are not paid, the bank could not issue the clearance certificate to the complainant. As on 01.03.2011, the complainant has to pay ` 25,009 to the bank. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on their part. Hence opposite parties canvassed for the dismissal of the complaint with cost.
5. From the above pleadings, following points are raised for consideration:
(1) Whether the complaint is maintainable before the Forum?
(2) Whether the reliefs sought for in the complaint are allowable?
(3) Reliefs and Costs?
Evidence of the complaint consists of the oral deposition of PW1 and DW1 and Exts.A1 to A4 and Ext.B1. After closure of evidence, both sides were heard.
6. Points 1 to 3: In order to prove the complainant’s case, complainant filed proof affidavit along with certain documents. He was examined as PW1 and the documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A4. Ext.A1 is the repayment schedule of loan issued by opposite parties. Ext.A2 is the receipt of `1,43,300 dated 30.11.2005 issued by opposite parties. Ext. A3 is the receipt of ` 6,755 dated 23.10.2008 issued by opposite parties. Ext. A3(a) is the receipt of `6,305 dated 22.08.2008 issued by opposite parties. Ext. A3(b) is the receipt of ` 24,000 dated 16.05.2008 issued by opposite parties. Ext. A3(c) is the receipt of ` 20,000 dated 04.12.2006 issued by opposite parties. Ext. A4 is the copy of pass book of complainant’s guarantor showing the payment of 31 monthly instalments and the total payment is ` 7,44,000.
7. In order to prove the opposite parties’ contention, first opposite party filed proof affidavit along with one document. He was examined as DW1 and the documents produced is marked as Ext. B1. Ext.B1 is the copy of account statement of the loan transaction.
8. On the basis of the contentions and arguments of the parties, we have perused the entire materials on record. Complainant’s case is that, he availed a vehicle loan from the opposite parties. As per the loan agreement, he repaid all instalments, but they failed to issue clearance certificate. Opposite parties’ contention is that complainant had not paid the instalments regularly as per terms. So he has to pay additional financial charges, and additional financial charges are due from the complainant unless and until the said dues are not cleared, opposite parties are not in a position to issue clearance certificate.
9. On a perusal of Ext. A2, it is seen that the complainant had paid `1,43,330 on 30.11.2005. Ext. A3 series shows that the complainant paid ` 6,755 on 23.10.2008, ` 6,305 on 22.08.2008, `24,000 on 16.05.2008 and ` 20,000 on 04.12.2006. Ext. A4 shows that he had paid ` 7,44,000. Therefore, the total amount paid by the complainant is ` 9,44,390. Ext. B1 shows that complainant has to pay ` 17,332-56 to opposite parties as additional financial charges.
10. As per Ext. B1, page No.1, the cash flow details are shown in it. It is seen that one year insurance deposit is ` 30,000. According to the complainant, insurance amount has not paid by opposite parties. The same has been paid by complainant. It is evident in PW1’s statement as follows:
“Hire purchase \nehnepÅt¸mÄ hml\¯n\v C³jpd³kv FSp¡p¶Xv I¼\n BsW¶p ]dbp¶p icnbÃ? (A) Rm³ t\cn«v FSp¡pIbmbncp¶p“.
11. Opposite party has not disproved the above contention by adducing cogent evidence. Therefore, it is presumed that opposite party has not paid the insurance amount of 30,000 and the complainant is entitled to get that amount, if the amount is not adjusted in loan account or dues.
12. Opposite party has no dispute that the complainant has not repaid the instalments as per Ext. A1. But their only contention is that he has not paid the instalments regularly as per terms. Therefore, he has to pay additional financial charges as per Reserve Bank’s guidelines. On a perusal of Ext.A1 and Ext. B1, we cannot find any provision for additional financial charges. Opposite parties have not produced the hire purchase agreement to prove the same. They were also not produced the Reserve Bank’s guidelines or circular authorizing them to collect the same. Moreover, opposite parties have not produced separate calculation statement regarding the financial charges and the period of delay in payments. Therefore, demand for additional financial charges without any basis is illegal, unfair, irrational, malafide and against all the cannons of justice. It is pertinent to note that contract status details recorded in first page of Ext. B1 is stated as “old status lives”. New status closed and charge date is 23.10.2008. Moreover, in last page of Ext. B1, it is seen that Ext. A3 amount of ` 6,755 is credited and balance is recorded as zero. This fact is also raised by the complainant in cross examination. PW1’s deposition is as follows:
“Ext. A3 series {]Imcw 23.10.08þepw ]Ww AS¨n«pv. 23.10.08 F¶ XobXn agreement Imemh[n IgnªpÅXmWv. N.O.C hm§p¶Xn\pthn FXrI£n \nÀ_Ôn¨Xnsâ t]cn AS¨ XpIbmWv. 23.10.08þse payment 21.8.08þ\p ap³]v Xs¶ agreement Imemh[n¡v Rm³ sImSpt¡nbncp¶ apgph³ XpIbpw sImSp¯ncp¶p. Cu CS]mSpambn _Ôs¸« bank statement lmPcm¡nbn«pv.”.
13. From the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the available evidence on records, it is crystal clear that the complainant repaid the loan as per Ext.A1 and closed the account on 23.10.2008. But opposite parties neither proved their contention with cogent evidence nor disproved the complainant’s case. Therefore, non-issuance of clearance certificate even after clearing the dues is not only a breach of contract but also a clear deficiency of service. However, the complainant had not proved the quantum of excess amount collected by the opposite parties. Hence this complaint can be allowed in part.
14. In the result, this complaint is allowed in part, thereby the opposite parties are directed to issue clearance certificate with compensation of ` 3,500 (Rupees Three thousand five hundred only) and a cost of ` 1,500 (Rupees One thousand five hundred only) within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is allowed to realize ` 25,000 (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) from the opposite parties with 9% interest per annum from this date till the realization of the whole amount.
Declared in the Open Forum on this the 23rd day of September, 2011.
(Sd/-)
N. Premkumar,
(Member)
Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) : (Sd/-)
Appendix:
Witness examined on the side of the complainant:
PW1 : James kutty Thomas
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:
A1 : Repayment schedule of loan issued by opposite parties.
A2 : Receipt of ` 1,43,300 dated 30.11.2005 issued by opposite
parties.
A3 : Receipt of ` 6,755 dated 23.10.2008 issued by opposite
parties.
A3(a) : Receipt of ` 6,305 dated 22.08.2008 issued by opposite
parties.
A3(b) : Receipt of ` 24,000 dated 16.05.2008 issued by opposite
parties.
A3(c) : Receipt of ` 20,000 dated 04.12.2006 issued by opposite
parties.
A4 : Copy of pass book of complainant’s guarantor.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties:
DW1 : Renjith Sebastian
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties:
B1 : Copy of AFC Statement as on 20.06.2011.
(By Order)
Senior Superintendent
Copy to:- (1) Jameskutty Thomas, Madappallil Grace Villa,
Elanthoor Village, Kozhencherry Taluk.
(2) The Manager, IndusInd Bank, Chandrima Building,
Near Cross Junction, Thiruvalla – 689 101.
(3) The Manager, IndusInd Bank, Regd. Office, 2401,
Gen. Thimmaya Road (East Street), Contonement,
Pune – 411 001.
(4) The Manager, IndusInd Bank, Corporate Office (Retail),
Sudarsan Buildings, 92 (Old No.86), Chamiers Road,
Chennai – 600 018.
(5) The Stock File.
