IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA Dated this the 6th day of July, 2010. Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President). Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member) Sri. N. Premkumar (Member) C.C.No.154/08 (Filed on 21.10.2008) Between: Rajan Rawther, Puthen Vilayil, Kurampala, Pandalam. …. Complainant. And: 1. Manojkumar, S/o. Bhaskaran, Palanilkunnathil Vadakkethil, Mangaram, Mannam Sugar Mill P.O., 2. R. Ratheesh, Territory Bense Manager, Sreeram Fortune Solutions Ltd., First Floor, Nandileth Plaza, College Junction, Pathanamthitta. 3. Manager, Sreeram City Union Finance Ltd., 39/3500 First Floor, Manikkath Cross Road, Ravipuram, Kochi-682 016. 4. Manager, Highlights Net Work Marketing Pvt. Ltd., D31/690, First Floor, Parvathi Nilayam- Buildings, Vyttila, Kochi-682 019. …. Opposite parties. ORDER Sri. N. Premkumar (Member): The complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite parties for getting a relief from the Forum. 2. Fact of the case in brief is as follows: Complainant is an Electrician. The first opposite party is the agent of 4th opposite party, the Highlights Network Marketing Pvt. Ltd. The third opposite party is a private financial institution and second opposite party is its Pathanamthitta Branch Manager. The 4th opposite party is the Manager of Highlights Network Marketing Pvt. Ltd. 3. On March 2006, first opposite party approached the complainant and offered a bike through 4th opposite party. He also persuaded to buy the bike and assure to arrange loan for the same. The first opposite party supplied a Yamaha Libero Bike bearing Reg. No.KL-03N/8620 through 4th opposite party with the loan of second opposite party. At the time of delivery of bike, first opposite party charged Rs.5,500/- for registration, tax, insurance and first instalment of loan. Moreover, at the time of agreement for purchasing the bike, second opposite party collected some documents including signed stamped papers and signed blank cheque leaves. 4. Even though the bike has handed over, the documents of registration, insurance certificate and tax token had not been shown to complainant. Complainant approached the opposite parties several time either to show the said documents or to issue copies. But they didn’t. As per agreement, the instalment has to be collected by collection agent of second opposite party in every month. They accepted 4 instalments of Rs.6,868/- but thereafter collection agent of second and third opposite parties would not approached and thereby defaulted the loan. Complainant has always ready to remit the instalments, on condition that opposite parties either to grant copies or to show the documents. This fact has informed to opposite parties by complainant. 5. Complainant approached opposite parties 1 to 4 several time for knowing the custody of documents. But opposite parties has not given a proper answer. This caused many inconvenience and hardship especially in times of police checking of vehicles. The said irresponsible attitude of opposite parties is a clear deficiency of service. Hence this complaint. 6. Opposite parties 1, 2 and 4 had not appeared and hence they were declared as exparty. Third opposite party appeared and filed version stating that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The opposite parties 1, 2 and 4 are totally unknown to the third opposite party. They are not at all related to the business of the third opposite party. They denied that the second opposite party is not the branch of the third opposite party. The second opposite party is in no way connected to third opposite party. The third opposite party is a non-banking finance company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 having its Regional Office at Chennai. It is working under the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. 7. Actual fact is that complainant approached the third opposite party for availing a finance facility for purchasing a two-wheeler. After verifying the application, they approved a finance facility of Rs.37,200/- for purchasing the said two wheeler. Complainant also entered into a loan-cum-hypothecation agreement with the 3rd opposite party on 29.04.2006. Complainant had purchased the said vehicle from the dealer, viz. Vijaya Auto Agencies. Complainant agreed to repay the loan amount in 36 equal monthly instalments starting from 07.06.206 to 07.06.2009, by remitting Rs.1467/- per month. But he committed default from the very beginning itself. The third opposite party has neither collected any other records, nor any number of stamped white papers, nor any signed blank cheques from the complainant. 8. The third opposite party is only a financier, who provided finance facility as per the terms and conditions of the hypothecation agreement. It is not the burden of the third opposite party to pay insurance or tax etc. of the complainant’s vehicle. It is the duty of the registered owner and the dealer to take registration of the vehicle. The registered owner cannot shift the burden of paying tax and insurance of his vehicle to a financer, the third opposite party. In this case, complainant willfully evaded from repaying the loan amount and the third opposite party initiated legal action. The complainant has filed this complaint as an attempt to escape from the legal action initiated against him and to escape from the liability. As per the terms of hypothecation agreement, there is a clause for referring the matter to Arbitration, if any dispute arises between parties. Hence this complaint is not maintainable. The third opposite party has not made any condition with the complainant that he would send any collection agents to his home for collecting the EMI’s. These types of allegations are raised so as to escape from the interest and overdues payable as per the terms of hypothecation agreement. Though the third opposite party approached several time for the loan amount, but he never turned up to do so. There is neither any deficiency of service, nor any unfair trade practice from the side of the third opposite party. Therefore, 3rd opposite party canvassed for the dismissal of the complainant with cost. 9. From the above pleadings, following points are raised for consideration: (1) Whether the complaint is maintainable before the Forum? (2) Whether the reliefs sought for in the complaint are allowable? (3) Reliefs and Cost? 10. Evidence of the complaint consists of the proof affidavit filed by the complainant along with certain documents. The documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A3. Evidence of opposite party consists of the proof affidavit filed by the third opposite party along with certain documents. The documents produced were marked as Exts.B1 to B5. After closure of the evidence, both parties were heard. 11. Points 1 to 3: In order to prove the complainant’s case, complainant filed proof affidavit along with certain documents. The documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A3. Ext.A1 is the copy of Advocate Notice sent to third opposite party. Ext.A2 is the copy of letter sent by the complainant to the Law Officer of third opposite party. Ext.A3 is the loan agreement produced by third opposite party. 12.From the opposite parties’ side, third opposite party filed proof affidavit along with certain documents. The documents were marked as Ext.B1 to B5. Ext.B1 is the notarized copy of the Power of Attorney of third opposite party. Ext.B2 is the copy of original agreement No.ISNRTWPNM00564/06 dated 29.04.2006. Ext.A3 is the copy of demand notice issued by third opposite part to complainant. Ext.B4 is the postal receipt of Ext.B3 dated 30.09.2008. Ext.B5 is the acknowledgment card of Ext.B3. 13. On the basis of the contention and averments of the parties, we have perused the entire materials on record. It is not disputed that complainant availed a loan of Rs.37,200/- and entered into a loan-cum-hypothecation agreement with third opposite party. The complainant’s allegation is that the opposite parties had not shown or issued copies of registration certificate, insurance certificate and tax token even though he approached several time. Another allegation is that third opposite party’s collection agent has not approached the complainant for collecting the instalment. It causes the default of instalment amount. 14. Though the complainant has sought relief from opposite parties 1, 2 and 4, the materials on record do not reveal their involvement. Ext.A3 shows that complainant has entered into a loan-cum-hypothecation agreement with 3rd opposite party and availed a loan amount of Rs.37,200/-. As per Ext.A3, complainant has to repay the loan amount by 36 equal monthly instalments remitting Rs.1,467/- per month. But complainant himself admitted that he defaulted the instalments. As per Ext.A3, it is the responsibility of complainant to pay the instalment amount. 15. According to the complainant, he purchased the bike and executed Ext.A3 on 29.04.2006. He has no complaint regarding the R.C. book, insurance certificate and tax token till the date of complaint before this Forum i.e. 21.10.2008. He has not made any explanation for that. In this context, the allegation “evading the repayment of loan” raised by third opposite party has some truth. Therefore, we cannot see any deficiency on opposite parties. Hence complaint is not allowable. 16. In the result, complaint is dismissed. No cost. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 6th day of July, 2010. (Sd/-) N. Premkumar, (Member) Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) : (Sd/-) Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member) : (Sd/-) Appendix: Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil. Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant: A1 : Photocopy of the Advocate Notice dated nil issued by the complainant to the third opposite party. A2 : Photocopy of the letter dated 30.04.2007 sent by the complainant to the Law Officer of the third opposite party. A3 : Loan-cum-Hypothecation Agreement executed by the complainant and the third opposite party. Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil. Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties: B1 : Photocopy of the Power of Attorney. B2 : Photocopy of the Loan-cum-Hypothecation agreement. B3 : Notice dated 21.05.2008 issued by the third opposite party to the complainant. B4 : Postal receipt of Ext.B3. B5 : Acknowledgment card of Ext.B3. (By Order) Senior Superintendent. Copy to:- (1) Rajan Rawther, Puthen Vilayil, Kurampala, Pandalam. (2) Manojkumar, Palanilkunnathil Vadakkethil, Mangaram, Mannam Sugar Mill P.O. (3) R. Ratheesh, Territory Bense Manager, Sreeram Fortune Solutions Ltd., First Floor, Nandileth Plaza, College Junction, Pathanamthitta. (4) Manager, Sreeram City Union Finance Ltd., 39/3500 First Floor, Manikkath Cross Road, Ravipuram, Kochi-682 016. (5) Manager, Highlights Net Work Marketing Pvt. Ltd., D31/690, First Floor, Parvathi Nilayam Buildings, Vyttila, Kochi-682 019. (6) The Stock File.
| | HONORABLE LathikaBhai, Member | HONORABLE Jacob Stephen, PRESIDENT | HONORABLE N.PremKumar, Member | | 
