By G. Yadunadhan, President:

            The case of the complainant is that complainant had taken an hire purchase loan from the opposite party on 13.3.2006 for his vehicle No. KL-7/J 279 Bus.  He had also taken Insurance policy from Oriental Insurance Co. and the copy of the policy was given to the opposite party on 15.3.2007.  When the complainant reached at the office of the opposite party, they told the complainant that they also had taken a policy for the same bus, for the same period from Unite India Insurance Co. as per policy No.020900/31/6/01/000/11/414 dated 1.2.2007.  But this fact was not intimated to the complainant.  Surprised by this act the complainant asked the opposite party to cancel and remit that amount towards his loan account.  The opposite party agreed for the same.  On 6.5.2008, when the complainant approached the opposite party for verification of the balance amount, it is seen that no such steps (to cancel the double policy) were taken by the opposite party, but they assured that they would take necessary steps.  On 6.5.2008 when the complainant approached for closing the loan amount they had insisted the complainant to pay an amount of Rs.42500/- towards over due and made him pay Rs.93100/- to close the amount.  On 28.6.2008 when the complainant approached the opposite party, they insisted to pay an amount of Rs.29000/- under the pretext of charging of bouncing of a cheque of Rs.20000- (an excess amount of Rs.9000/- for the alleged bouncing of a cheque worth Rs.20000/-).  According to repay schedule, total instalments were 35 in numbers for the total hire purchase amount, i.e., Rs.370920/- (ranging from 13.3.2006 to 13.1.2009).  Though the complainant made the prior closure loan amount during June 2008 the opposite party collected an amount of more than Rs.350957/-.  Therefore complainant is seeking relief against the opposite party to return an amount of Rs.71065/-. 

            After serving notice, opposite party was called absent and set exparte.

            Complainant  filed affidavit and he was examined as PW1.  Ext. A1 to A6 were marked on the side of the complainant.

            From the deposition, affidavit and Exts. A1 to A6, complainant’s case is proved. 

            In the result petition is allowed and the opposite party is directed to return an amount of Rs.29000/- as per Ext.A4, which is already collected in excess and a compensation of Rs.2000/- to the complainant.  Comply the order within 30 days on receipt of the copy of this order.

            Pronounced in open Court this the 20^th  day of March 2009.

                                                Sd/-President                                  Sd/-Member

APPENDIX

Documents exhibited for the complainant:

A1        Repayment schedule.

A2            Receipt for Rs.93100/-.

A3            Receipt for Rs.42500/-

A4            Receipt for Rs.29000/-.

A5            Certificate cum policy schedule of the Oriental Insurance Co.

A6        True copy of registered lawyer notice dated18.7.2008.

Documents exhibited for the opposite party:

Nil.

Witness examined for the complainant:

PW1            Sasikumar U.P., S/o. Rajagopalan, Thekkepattu House, P.O. Pulassery – Complainant.

Witness examined for the opposite party:

None.

-/True copy/-

Sd/-President

(Forwarded/By Order)

Senior Superintendent.