IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA,
Dated this the 30th day of July, 2012.
Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President)
Sri. N. Premkumar (Member)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member)
C.C.No. 73/2012 (Filed on 27.03.2012)
Between:
Renji Thomas,
Renji Vilasam,
Nirathupara.P.O.,
Koodal.
(By Adv. Sunitha.K.K) …. Complainant
And:
1. Manager,
Sreeram City Union Finance Ltd.,
1st Floor, Manikkath,
Cross Road, Ravipuram,
Kochi.
2. Branch Manager,
Sreeram City Union Finance Ltd.,
Pathanamthitta.
(By Adv. Sreeraj. D for Opps. 1 & 2)
3. Sylesh,
Collection Agent,
Sreeram City Union Finance Ltd.,
Pathanamthitta. …. Opposite parties.
O R D E R
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member):
The complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite parties for getting a relief from the Forum.
2. The complainant’s case is that complainant has availed a Hire Purchase Loan of ` 29,700 from the opposite parties for purchasing a TVS Star Motor Cycle. At the time of sanctioning the loan the opposite parties have received 36 cheques for the satisfaction of monthly instalments. The monthly instalment was ` 1,147.
3. Opposite parties as the financier of the vehicle has kept R.C. Book, one key, and other documents of the vehicle. As per the loan agreement after remittance of whole loan amount all the documents and key should be returned to the complainant.
4. After the full payment of the loan amount complainant demanded NOC, key, records etc. of the vehicle by written notice. But 2nd opposite party did not turned up. The conduct of the opposite party is a clear deficiency of service which caused mental agony and financial loss to the complainant. Hence the opposite parties are liable to issue the NOC and other documents along with compensation of ` 50,000 and cost.
5. 1st and 2nd opposite party entered appearance and filed joint version with the following contention. Opposite parties admit the hypothecation agreement with the complainant for the purchase of anew motor bike. The loan amount is advanced for a term of 36 months, and shall be repaid in equal instalment of ` 1,147 each. The complainant was a chronic defaulter and had started default in payment of monthly instalment from 07.03.2007. Due to this chronic default the complainant is bound to pay interest and penal interest for each default in addition to cheque bouncing charges as per agreement and as such a substantial amount is outstanding in the loan account and the complainant is bound to pay the same to the opposite parties. The complainant never paid the monthly instalment in time as per agreement. He has to pay the monthly instalment by 7th of each month as per agreement. No cheque without date and amount is collected from the complainant as security by the 2nd opposite party. Moreover, opposite parties never received or collected the key of the vehicle or R.C. Book or any kind of document from the complainant.
6. Without closing the loan account this opposite party is not in a position to issue NOC to the complainant. The complainant must pay the agreed interest for each defaulted instalments along with cheque dishonouring charges as per the terms and conditions of the agreement which is executed between the complainant and the company. Hence the opposite parties pray for the dismissal of the complaint with the cost of the opposite parties as they have not committed any deficiency in service.
7. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the only point to be considered is whether this complaint can be allowed or not?
8. The evidence of this complaint consists of the oral testimony of PW1, DW1, Exts.A1 to A3 and Exts.B1 to B3. After closure of evidence both sides were heard.
9. Complainant’s case is that complainant entered into a hypothecation agreement with the opposite parties for purchasing a motor bike. Opposite parties as the financier of the vehicle has kept R.C. Book, One key and other documents of the vehicle. As per the loan agreement after remittance of whole loan amount all the documents and key should return to the complainant. After full payment of the loan amount complainant demanded NOC and other documents. But the opposite parties did not turned up. According to the complainant, the above said act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service.
10. In order to prove the case, complainant filed proof affidavit along with 3 documents. On the basis of the proof affidavit complainant was examined as PW1 and the documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A3. Ext.A1 is the copy of notice sent by the complainant to the opposite parties. Ext.A2 is the passbook of the complainant with Pathanamthitta Service Co-op: Bank Ltd. Ext.A3 is the receipt issued by Shriram City Union Finance Ltd.
11. On the other hand, the contention of the opposite party is that the complainant is a defaulter in repaying the monthly instalments and he is liable to compensate the opposite party for the loss sustained by them as per hypothecation agreement entered between the complainant and the opposite parties. The total balance due to the opposite party is ` 8,061. Since the complainant has to clear the dues, the non-issue of the NOC is not a deficiency in service.
12. In order to prove the contention of the opposite party, the power of attorney holder of the opposite party filed proof affidavit along with 3 documents and on the basis of the proof affidavit the documents were marked as Ext.B1 to B3. Ext.B1 is the loan application. Ext.B2 is the loan cum-hypothecation agreement. Ext.B3 is the statement of accounts of the complainant.
13. On the basis of the contentions and arguments of the parties we have perused the entire materials on record and found that there is no dispute between the parties with regard to the hypothecation agreement. Complainant alleged that he had regularly paid the 36 instalments without default. But the opposite parties’ contention is that complainant is a defaulter. Even though the complainant produced and marked Ext.A2 pass book which does not disclose the entire remittance of 36 instalments within time. The sole contention raised by the opposite party is that complainant had not paid the monthly instalments regularly. For proving this they have produced and marked Ext.B2 statement of account which clearly shows the remittance as well as the dues of the complainant. Ext.B2 shows that after the first instalment on 07.02.2007 the complainant defaulted the second instalment due on 07.03.2007 and subsequently he made the payment of second instalment only on 07.05.2007. This type of defaults in the payment of instalment can be seen from Ext.B3 for several months.
14. The opposite parties also produced and marked Ext.B2 loan cum hypothecation agreement which was signed by both parties. As per the repayment schedule the loan amount has to be repaid in 36 instalments and on the dates specified in the schedule and the delay in the payment will attract penal interest and the complainant is liable to pay the penal interest for the delayed payments.
15. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the complainant has dues and the opposite parties are not liable to give the NOC without clearing the dues. In the circumstances, we find no irregularity or deficiency of service against the opposite parties. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
16. In the result, this complaint is dismissed. No cost.
17. However opposite parties are at liberty to waive penal interest and other extra charges for an amicable settlement in this dispute.
Declared in the Open Forum on this the 30th day of July, 2012.
(Sd/-)
K.P. Padmasree,
(Member)
Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) : (Sd/-)
Sri. N. Premkumar (Member) : (Sd/-)
Appendix:
Witness examined on the side of the complainant:
PW1 : Renji Thomas
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:
A1 : Photocopy of the complaint sent by the complainant to the
2nd opposite party.
A2 : Passbook of complainant with Pathanamthitta Service Co-
op: Bank Ltd.
A3 : Receipt dated 31.07.2008 issued by 2nd opposite party to
the complainant.
Witness examined on the side of the complainant:
DW1 : Shihabudeen. M.N.
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:
B1 : Loan application dated 19.01.2007.
B2 : Loan cum-hypothecation agreement dated 19.01.2007.
B3 : Statement of accounts of the complainant.
(By Order)
(Sd/-)
Senior Superintendent.
Copy to:- (1) Renji Thomas, Renji Vilasam, Nirathupara.P.O.,
Koodal.
(2) Manager, Sreeram City Union Finance Ltd.,
1st Floor, Manikkath, Cross Road, Ravipuram,
Kochi.
(3) Branch Manager, Sreeram City Union Finance Ltd.,
Pathanamthitta.
(4) Sylesh, Collection Agent, Sreeram City Union Finance
Ltd., Pathanamthitta.
(5) The Stock File.
