Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/13/2015

Karthikeyan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Minjur TVS Motors - Opp.Party(s)

R. Santhanam

08 Feb 2022

ORDER

IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI.

 

Present:   Hon’ble THIRU. JUSTICE. R. SUBBIAH                     :     PRESIDENT

                 Tmt. Dr. S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI                          :      MEMBER

 

F.A. No. 13 of 2015

(Against the order passed in C.C. No.21/2013 dated 24.02.2014 on the file of the D.C.D.R.F.Thiruvallur.

 

Tuesday, the 8^th day of February 2022

 

K. Karthikeyan

S/o. Jagadeesan

No.3, Murugan Koil Street

Nanthiyambakkam

Ponneri – 601 204

Thiruvallur District.                                                .. Appellant/ Complainant

 

- Vs –

 

1.  Minjur TVS Motors

     ASR Complex, T.H. Road

     Minjur, Chennai – 601 203.

 

2.  The Director

     M/s. TVS Credit Services Ltd.,

     Thiru Vi.Ka Industrial Estate

     Guindy, Chennai 600 032.   

 

3.  Area Collection Manager

     M/s. TVS Credit Services Ltd.,

     Thiru Vi.Ka Industrial Estate

     Guindy, Chennai 600 032.                       .. Respondents/ Opposite Parties

 

   

   

 

 Counsel for Appellant /Complainant           : M/s. R. Santhanam

Counsel for the Respondents 1 &3 /Opposite Parties 1&3: Called Absent

Counsel for the 2^nd Respondent /2^nd Opposite Party : M/s. A.Raja & N.Rajangam

                                                                            

This appeal is coming before us for final hearing on 10.01.2022 and on hearing the arguments of the Appellant and 2^nd Respondent and on perusing the material records, this Commission made the following :-

 

O R D E R

HON’BLE THIRU JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH, PRESIDENT

1.        This appeal has been filed by the Appellant / Complainant under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as against the order passed in C.C. No.21/2013 dated 24.02.2014 on the file of the D.C.D.R.F., Thiruvallur, seeking for enhancement of the compensation amount awarded by the District Forum.

 

2.   The factual background culminating this appeal is as follows: The case of the Appellant/ Complainant is that on 17.03.2011 he availed financial assistance of Rs.25,500/- from the 3^rd respondent for purchasing a TVS Excel Super HD two wheeler vehicle.  The vehicle was taken delivery from the first opposite party.  The Registration number of the vehicle is TN 18 F 2415.  As per the repayment schedule pattern the loan amount is repayable through 3 advance instalments and 15 regular instalments.  The third opposite party had already collected post-dated cheques from the complainant and collected the instalments through the post dated cheques from the Savings Bank Account of the complainant.  On 27.01.2012, during the existence of the loan period, the third opposite party deducted a sum of Rs.691/- from the complainant’s account for the purpose of premium payment towards the insurance policy for his vehicle.  But, they had failed to pay the insurance premium.  In such a situation, on 11.04.2012, the said vehicle met with an accident, causing severe damage to the vehicle and grievous injuries to the appellant’s father.  The appellant spent huge amount for the medical treatment of his father and also for repairing the vehicle.  Since the respondents failed to pay the insurance premium, there was no insurance coverage on the date of accident.  Hence, the appellant was put to severe loss, hardship, mental agony and suffering due to deficiency of service by the respondents.  Hence, the complainant has filed the present complaint, claiming a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-  as compensation for deficiency of service, Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.25,000/- towards litigation expenses. 

 

3.  The said complaint was resisted by the Insurance company stating that the disputed cheque for a sum of Rs.691/- issued by the complainant towards premium amount was presented with the complainant’s banker namely, Axis Bank.  When the cheque was dishonoured, the opposite party received a e-mail from the Bankers on 28.01.2012 stating that the cheque bearing No.000009 was returned unpaid due to ‘insufficient funds’.  But, there was sufficient amount in the complainant’s account to pass the cheque.   This mistake was committed by the Axis Bank, CMS Centre, Chennai.  Since the cheque was dishonoured, the second opposite party did not renew the insurance policy of the complainant.  After 4 months from the date of presentation of the cheque, on 23.04.2012, the same amount was credited into the account of the second opposite party.  Therefore, there is no deficiency on the part of the opposite party and if at all there was deficiency in service, it was only by the Axis Bank. 

 

4.  In order to prove the claim, on the side of the complainant proof affidavit was filed and 13 documents were marked as Ex.A1 to Ex.A13.  On the side of opposite parties, along with proof affidavit 3 documents were marked as Ex.B1 to Ex.B3.

 

5.  The District Forum, after analyzing the evidence and entire records, has come to the conclusion that there was negligence on the part of the opposite parties and directed 2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.5000/- towards litigation expenses. Not being satisfied with the said amount, the present appeal has been filed.

 

8.  Heard the submissions and perused the material available on records.

 

9.   Counsel for the appellant submitted that since the opposite parties failed to renew the insurance policy, the appellant was forced to spend huge amount for repairing the vehicle which met with the accident.  In fact , the District Forum has come to a conclusion, with an elaborate order that the fault is with the insurance company and the Bank.  But the District Forum has awarded only Rs.25,000/- as compensation, which is inadequate.  Therefore, he prayed for enhancement of the compensation amount.

 

10.  On perusal of the order, we find that the negligence is only on the part of the Axis Bank, which has negligently returned the cheque stating “insufficient funds” though sufficient funds were available in the account of the complainant.  But, the complainant has not added the Axis Bank as a party to the complaint.  Infact, 2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties ought to have challenged the findings of the District Forum by filing an appeal.  In the absence of an appeal by the 2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties, we are not in a position to reverse the findings of the District Forum, except to confirm the order passed by the District Forum.  Therefore, considering the circumstances, we do not find any valid reasons to enhance the compensation amount awarded as against the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents. 

 

 

11.  In the result, the Appeal is dismissed, confirming the order passed in       C.C. No.21/2013 dated 24.02.2014 on the file of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thiruvallur.   There shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. 

 

 

S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI                                                           R.SUBBIAH

         MEMBER                                                                          PRESIDENT

 

 

Index :  Yes/ No

AVR/SCDRC/Chennai/Orders/February/2022