SMT. MOLYKUTTY MATHEW : MEMBER

This is a complaint filed by the complainant U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 for an order directing the opposite party to give NOC to remove the hypothecation endorsement in the RC  book and to pay Rs.3,00,000/- as cost and compensation for mental agony caused to the complainant for the for the deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party.

The case of the complainant in brief

            The complainant had availed a vehicle loan of Rs.54,100/- from the OP on 28/09/2019  and hypothecating the vehicle bearing Reg.No. KL 59 U 8935 Bajaj CT 100/100 C two wheeler.  At the time of sanctioning the loan the complainant executed a hypothecation agreement with the OP and the hypothecation with the OP was endorsed in the RC of the vehicle.  That the said loan ought to have repaid from 03/11/2019 to 03/08/2023 for a total amount of Rs.78,070/-.  But within the period of 26/05/2023 itself the complainant had paid Rs.90,730/- to OP.  The complainant states that the OP had connected the auto debit system of Repayment in his account, but sometimes the OP’s representative collected the loan amount directly from his hand and adjusted to his loan account also.  Thereafter on 13/08/2023 without the presence of complainant the OP’s representative came to complainant’s house and demanded and threatened complainant’s age old mother and collected Rs.4,000/- from his mother.   Moreover the OP’s representatives states that the complainant has also pending Rs.20,368/- to OP for the balance amount of the vehicle loan.  But as per the agreement the complainant had paid the full loan amount.  Then the complainant had asked for issuing clearance certificate but the OP was evading the said request and the OP’s illegally demanding more money from the complainant.   Then the complainant sent a lawyer notice to OP.  After receiving notice no reply send by OP.  The non-closing of loan account and non issuing of hypothecation termination letter by OP to complainant there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the par to OP.  Hence the complaint.

            After filing the complaint notice issued to OP.  The OP received notice and not appeared before the commission and not filed version.  The OP received and not appeared before the commission and not filed version.  The commission had to hold that the OP not appeared before the commission and not filed version.   The commission had to hold that the OP not appeared before the commission and no version filed.  As such this case came to be proceed against the OP as set ex-parte. 

            Even though the OP remained ex-parte it is for the complainant to establish the allegations made by him against the OP.  Hence the complainant was called up on to produce evidence in the form of affidavit and documents.  Accordingly the complainant has chosen to produce his affidavit along with 2 documents marked as Ext.A1 and A2.  The complainant was examined as Pw1.  So the OP remained absent in this case.  At the end the commission heard the case on merit.

            Let us have a clear glance at the relevant documents of the complainant.  In ext.A1 is the statement of account of the loan A/c No.L2WKNR07689692  of the complainant.  It clearly shows that the complainant had paid Rs.90730/- to OP as the total loan amount dated 26/05/2023.  In Ext. A2 is RC certificate of complainant’s Vehicle KL59U8935.  The OP received Rs.90730/- from the complainant and the OP is not closing the loan account of the complainant and non issuing of hypothecation termination letter also.  So there is deficiency of service an unfair trade practice on the part of OP and the complainant is entitle dot get ‘No Objection Certificate’ form the OP with compensation for the mental agony and difficulties occurred to the complainant.

In the result the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite party to close the loan account of the complainant and to issue “No objection certificate” in relation to this disputed loan to the complainant.  The opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental agony caused to the complainant  and Rs.5,000/- as litigation cost within 30 days of receipt of this order.  If OP fails to comply the order the complainant is at liberty to execute the order as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act 2019. 

Exts.

A1 –Statement of account from 03/11/2019 to 26/05/2023  issued by OP

A2-Certificate of Registration (RC)

     Sd/                                                                                   Sd/                                                       Sd/

PRESIDENT                                                                  MEMBER                                             MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                                               Molykutty Mathew                                     Sajeesh K.P

(mnp)

/Forward by order/

Assistant Registrar