BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

C.C. No. 272/2008 Filed on 17.11.2008

Dated : 30.11.2009

Complainant:

S. Krishna Prasad, S/o R. Sreedhara Panicker, residing at “Brindavan”, Thycaud, Thiruvananthapuram.

(By adv. K. Murlidharan Nair)

Opposite parties:

1. ICICI Bank Ltd. Having its registered offices at Land Mark, Race Course Circle, Vadodara-390 007 represented by its Managing Director.

    

2. The State Head, Car Loan Section, ICICI Bank, Opposite Edapally Church, Ernakulam-682 024.

    

3. ICICI Bank, Vazhuthacaud, Thiruvananthapuram represented by its Manager.

    

4. The Manager, ICICI Bank, Vazhuthacaud, Thiruvananthapuram.

This O.P having been heard on 21.11.2009, the Forum on 30.11.2009 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

The allegations in the complaint are the following: The complainant in 2002, with the intention of purchasing a second hand car approached Mr. Nazzar, the proprietor of Azad hotel, who it was known, was interested in selling his Honda City Car bearing registration No. KL-01 R 8888. The complainant negotiated with the said Mr. Nazzar and fixed the price at Rs. 4 lakhs. For the purpose of securing the said amounts the complainant approached the opposite parties. The opposite parties agreed to sanction the loan for Rs. 4 lakhs on 24.12.2002 on a condition that the R.C Book of the vehicle be retained by them as security for the loan. Subsequently, the opposite parties directly handed over Rs. 4 lakhs to the said Nazzar and received from him the original papers of the vehicle and the transfer form signed by him. The opposite parties also received from the complainant fees for transferring the vehicle in the name of the complainant. The complainant continued to pay the instalments towards the loan, regularly and in time. Whileso, the said vehicle of the complainant met with an accident on 06.03.2007 at Chavara and sustained damages. The complainant therefore approached the Oriental Insurance Company with whom the vehicle was insured to claim the amounts for the rectification of the damages to the vehicle. The said Oriental Insurance Company, however, refused to honour the claim, as the vehicle was still registered in the name of the earlier owner, Mr. Nazzar. It was then that the complainant became aware of the fact that the vehicle was still registered in the name of the said Mr. Nazzar and that the opposite parties had not transferred the vehicle in the name of the complainant as undertaken by them. Complainant therefore wrote to the 2^nd opposite party on 12.03.2007, requesting the opposite parties to return the original papers of the vehicle, including the original R.C Book for making the said insurance claim. No reply was furnished to the said letter and the original papers were also not handed over. Therefore complainant was forced to bear the cost of repairs to the vehicle by himself. An amount of Rs. 23,824/- was expended towards repair of the vehicle. The vehicle was delivered after repair only on 18.03.2007. Complainant was made aware by the insurance company that he would not be able to make any claim to the insurance company for damages caused to him, as the said vehicle was not registered in his name. As such the said vehicle was left at the house of the complainant without being ridden at all. The complainant was therefore forced to engage the services of a taxicab on hire from 07.03.2007 till 31.05.2007 and had to expend amounts to the tune of Rs. 1,11,503/-. However, the complainant was again forced to use the said vehicle as he could not afford to use a taxicab indefinitely. The complainant therefore decided to sell the vehicle and purchase another vehicle to get rid of the botheration and mental tension. When enquiries were made, it was learned that the price of the vehicle, would be very less, than what could be obtained with the original R.C Book. This loss which is sustained by the complainant has to be compensated by the opposite parties. Hence this complaint against the opposite parties.

The opposite parties inspite of service of notice did not turn up to contest the case or file any version. Hence they have been set exparte.

Complainant has filed affidavit and marked Exts. P1 to P10 on his side.

From the contentions raised in the complaint, the following issues arise for consideration.

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled for any of the reliefs claimed?

Points (i) & (ii):- The complainant has pleaded that he had availed a loan for Rs. 4 lakhs from the ICICI Bank for the purchase of a second hand car. According to the complainant, the loan was sanctioned on a condition that the R.C book has to be surrendered as security for the loan. The complainant has pleaded that the opposite parties received the original papers of the vehicle along with the transfer form signed by him. The complainant alleges that the vehicle is still registered in the name of the earlier owner. Ext. P5 dated 19.08.2008 issued by the Insurance company to the complainant would go to show that, the registered owner of the vehicle No. KL01 R 8888 is one A.A. Abdul Nazzar. The insurance company has admitted in Ext. P5 that, the complainant has taken out a policy of insurance, but they have further stated that the complainant does not have any insurable interest in the subject matter of insurance, ie; the vehicle, so long as Mr. Abdul Nazzar remains its owner. Ext. P9 registration particulars of the vehicle in dispute shows the name of registered owner as Abdul Nazzar. A.A.

Though the opposite parties remain exparte, the complainant has produced Ext. P10 dated 13.03.2009 which is seen issued by ICICI Bank to the complainant, wherein the opposite parties have agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- as a gesture of goodwill and as full and final settlement. As per Ext. P10, it has been stated that “the Bank on its part assures to you, it shall put in all earnest efforts and initiate actioning for the procurement of a duplicate Registration Certificate of the Honda City Car numbered KL-01 R 8888. The Bank estimates the rough time for the said exercise to be roughly around 90 days. On procurement of the same, the Bank shall hand over the same to you and in the meantime you have agreed to that the above mentioned consumer case filed against the Bank and its employees shall be withdrawn as the matter is being amicably settled between yourselves and the Bank and the Bank having agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- as a goodwill gesture and as full and final settlement of your claim of Rs. 2,35,327/- as mentioned in the complaint.” But the opposite parties have never appeared before the Forum and challenge the allegations levelled against them. From the records, it is evident that, the opposite parties have not transferred the vehicle in the name of the complainant inspite of receipt of fees for the same. The receipt of the fee for the same stands admitted as it is not disputed or denied by the opposite parties.

The complainant has filed his affidavit in support of the claim made in the complaint. He has not been cross examined and hence his affidavit stands unchallenged and uncontroverted. Ext. P4 is the estimate for Rs. 23,825/- issued to the complainant for the vehicle in dispute. We have perused the records furnished by the complainant and are of the view that the complainant has succeeded in establishing his complaint. The deficiency in service against the opposite parties stands proved. The opposite parties have never turned up to challenge the amounts specified in the complaint. Complainant has claimed a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- towards mental agony which we find as exorbitant and hence we reduce the said amount and allow Rs. 5,000/- towards compensation. From the foregoing discussions we find that on the strength of Ext. P10 the complainant is entitled for refund of Rs. 1,90,327/- along with a cost of Rs. 2,000/-.

In the result complaint is allowed. The opposite parties shall pay an amount of Rs. 1,90,327/- to the complainant along with a cost of Rs.2,000/- within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order failing which the entire amount shall carry interest @ 9% from the date of order till realization.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 30^th day of November 2009.

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

jb

C.C. No. 272/2008

APPENDIX

I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :

NIL

II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :

P1 - Copy of letter dated 07.03.2007 addressed to Oriental

Insurance company.

P2 - Copy of letter dated 12.03.2007 issued by complainant to

the Manager, ICICI Bank Car Loan Section.

P3 - Acknowledgement card signed by the opposite party.

P4 - Estimate issued by Peninsular Honda.

P5 - Letter dated 19.08.2008 issued by Oriental Insurance

Company to complainant.

P6 - Invoice dated 05.06.2007 issued by the Velocity the Travel

Company to complainant.

P7 - Copy of advocate notice dated 09.03.2008.

P8 - Acknowledgement card and postal receipt

P9 - Registration particulars dated 14.08.2008 issued by Motor

Vehicles Department.

P10 - Letter dated 13.03.2009 issued by ICICI Bank to

complainant.

III OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESS :

NIL

IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS :

NIL

PRESIDENT