Kerala

Malappuram

CC/366/2015

SIVADASAN - Complainant(s)

Versus

MANAGER - Opp.Party(s)

30 Mar 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
MALAPPURAM
 
Complaint Case No. CC/366/2015
( Date of Filing : 15 Sep 2015 )
 
1. SIVADASAN
S/O KADUNGAN PERIKATHRA HOUSE IRINGALLUR POST KOTTAKKAL VIA MALAPPURAM
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. MANAGER
MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD 2 ND FLOOR AYSHA COMPLEX THAZHEPALAM TIRUR MALAPPURAM
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. AA VIJAYAN PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MS. MADANAVALLY RK MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. MINI MATHEW MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 30 Mar 2017
Final Order / Judgement

By: Smt. R.K.Madanavally, Member

The complainant had purchased a pick up lorry bearing No. KL 65B 2456 with the financial
assistance of opposite party for his lively hood. Rs. 1,30000/- was paid by him and 450,000/- availed as
loan. The value of the vehicle was Rs.680000/-. At the time of availing loan, opposite party had
collected several signed blank papers, cheques etc from the complainant. The loan amount had to be
paid in 36 monthly installments.

The complainant was ready to pay the loan as per agreed rate of interest. But the opposite party
was adjusting the paid amount not to the loan amount , but inspection charges, interest charged on
interest, notice charges and collection charges etc. The complainant took a loan of Rs.4,50,000/- , out of
which 3,72,700/- was only given to him by the opposite party. Since the complainant noted that the
amounts are not adjusted to the loan amount, he informed the opposite party that he was ready to close the

loan. But the opposite party demanded illegal amount. All the receipts issued by the opposite party
were of vanishing type.

The complainant had remitted 25 monthly installments. On 2/9/15, the opposite party along with
their gundas seized the vehicle forcefully and illegally. Though the complainant made complaint before
Kottakkal police station and superintendent of police , Malappuram no action was taken by them.

The complainant had fitted LCD screens, lights, tyres, music system etc in the vehicle. Now they
are demanding Rs.2,40,000/- as interest on interest. The opposite party No.1 informed the complainant
that the loan is having interest rate of 24% to 36% flat rate interest and only on payment of of the said
amount loan will be closed. The complainant was always ready to pay the loan amount with agreed rate
of interest. He had already remitted most of the loan amount and now he is willing to close the loan. But
the opposite party No.1 is demanding illegal amount by way of additional hire charge, notice charges,
inspection charges etc.

Now the vehicle had been seized by the gundas of opposite party and because of all these

reasons, the complaint is filed.

A detailed version was filed by the opposite party by denying the averements / allegations in the
complaint. The issuance of loan was admitted , but the execution of signature in blank documents, the
adjustment of amounts towards inspection charges and other charges, the forceful seizure of the vehicle ,
the averements of putting LCD screens, Music system etc in the vehicle by the complainant and the
illegal demanding of interest on interest etc were denied.

According to the opposite party, the complainant was a defaulter and an amount of Rs.163430/-
towards monthly installments , Rs. 87060/- towards future amount, Rs.73002/- as AFC and Rs.500/- as
cost were incurred due towards the opposite party from the complainant.

After defaulting the amount, the complainant surrendered the vehicle before opposite party .
They never demanded Rs.240,000/- from the complainant. They accounted and collected the amount
properly as per the stipulations and guide lines issued by the government. Due to the default in
payments, the complainant is liable to pay an amount of Rs.329992/- to the opposite party.

More over, the complainant did not comply the interim order of this Forum for taking steps to
depposite pending EMI's. The opposite party had committed no deficiency in service. They had
collected the amount in correct and legal manner and had issued proper receipt to the complainant. Hence
, because of all these reasons, the complaint has to be dismissed with cost.

Now the points arises for our consideration here in are;
(1) Whether the opposite parties are deficient in service?
(2) Relief and cost.

Point No.1
Complainant filed chief affidavit and Ext. A1 and A2 are marked. Ext. A1 is the copy of the
RC bearing Reg. No.KL -65B – 2456 and Ext. A2 is the receipt . Though it was recorded as no
additional version and additional affidavit filed by the opposite parties, it was seen in the bundle. Ext.
B1 to B4 are marked, Ext. B1 is the statement of account, Ext. B2 is the letter issued by opposite party
infavour of the complainant, Ext. B3 is the registered letter issued by opposite party infavour of Yasodha
and Ext.B4 is the vehicle inventory receipt dated 2/9/15.

Heard both sides and perused records. At the time of filing the complaint, the second prayer in
the complaint was, order the opposite parties to collect the loan amount with agreed rate of interest and to
return back the vehicle. But the prayer was deleted as per IA 677/16.

Now the main relief seeking by the complainant against the opposite parties are, direct the
opposite parties to issue the Hire Purchase Termination letter and further, order to pay compensation of
Rs.6,80,000/-.

We have gone through the entire documents. According to the complainant the vehicle is
completely damaged and they are entitled to get the total value ie Rs.680000/- from the opposite party.

The complainant has not adduced any evidence or document to prove that the vehicle is totally
damaged.
After getting interim order in IA 413/15, the complainant went to the yard of the opposite party

and seen that the vehicle is in a bad shape, the body parts were rusted, the tyres and parts are changed and
costly parts were removed etc. The interim order was passed on 30/9/15. The bad condition of the
vehicle was submitted before this Forum through as IA 667/18 for amending the prayer in the complaint.
The above IA was filed on 29/9/16, ie, after one year. During the above period of one year the
complainant never complied the order in former IA for paying the dues or they never brought before the
attention of this forum that the vehicle is in bad condition . As per the order in above IA dated 30/9/15,
the complainant was directed to pay the pending EMI's within 15 days . It was not complied. That itself
shows that the complainant was negligent. More over, the illegal seizure, demanding of illegal amount
etc are also not prooved.

In the chief affidavit the complainant is demanding a defect free vehicle. But the documents
produced by the complainant is not sufficient to grant the above relief. He submitted that the vehicle is
fully damaged. The complainant has not taken any steps to examine the vehicle with the assistance of an
expert. So unless and until the defects are not proved we can not say that opposite parties we re deficient
in their service. We have no cogent evidence before us for allowing the complainant. The first point is
answered accordingly.

Point No.2
In views of the discussion and findings, the complaint is dismissed . No cost.

Dated this 30th

day of March, 2017.

A.A.VIJAYAN,
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.A1and A2
Ext.A1 : Copy of the RC bearing Reg. No.KL -65B – 2456.
Ext.A2 : Receipt.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Ext. B1 to B
Ext.B1 : Statement of account,
Ext.B2 : Letter issued by opposite party infavour of the complainant
Ext.B3 : Registered letter issued by opposite party infavour of Yasodha

Ext.B4 : Vehicle inventory receipt dated 2/9/15.

A.A.VIJAYAN,
PRESIDENT

R.K.MADANAVALLY , MEMBER

MINI MATHEW, MEMBER

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. AA VIJAYAN]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MS. MADANAVALLY RK]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. MINI MATHEW]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.