BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION - HYDERABAD
F.A.No.44/2008 against C.C.No.32/2007 , District Forum-II, East Godavari at Rajahmundry.
Between-
Janapa Reddy Venkataramana,
S/o.Gopalam,
Kamarajupeta,-533 285,
Gokavaram Mandal,
East Godavari Dist.
Andhra Pradesh. ... Appellant/
Complainant
And
The Manager ,
ICICI Bank Home Finance Ltd.,
D.No.46-22-11, Karrisura Reddy Plaza,
Danavaipeta, Rajahmundry-533 101,
East Godavari District,
Andhra Pradesh. ...Respondent/
Opp.party
Counsel for the appellant - party in person.
Counsel for the respondent - M/s N.Harinath Reddy.
CORAM-THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT,
SMT M.SHREESHA, HON’BLE MEMBER
AND
SRI G.BHOOPATHI REDDY, HON’BLE MEMBER
THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY,
TWO THOUSAND EIGHT .
Oral Order - (Per Sri G.Bhoopathi Reddy, Hon’ble Member)
----
This is an appeal filed by the appellant/complainant under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act , 1986 to set aside the dismissal order passed by the District Forum-II, East Godavari, Rajahmundry in C.C.No.32/2007 dt. 11.10.2007
The appellant herein is the complainant before the District Forum. He filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 to direct the opp.party to pay compensation of Rs.2 lakhs and Rs.50,000/- towards expenses.
The case of the complainant is as follows-
The complainant has purchased Hero Honda Motor Cycle by paying cash of Rs.17000/- and he took the balance of sale price of the said vehicle as a loan from the branch of the opposite party at Kakinada. The loan amount was to be repaid in 30 equal instalments at the rate of Rs.1,452/- p.m. The complainant had opened SB account with Kakinada Cooperative Town Bank Ltd. on 5.8.2005 and presented 30 blank cheque leaves to the opp.party. In the month of February,2006 he deposited the instalment amount in his bank account on 23.2.2006 and as his cheque issued earlier was presented on 8th and 16th of February,2006 was not honoured. By 5.5.2006 balance of Rs.4,017/- was there in the complainant’s account. 6.5.2006 and 9.5.2006 when the complainant went to opp.party bank for payment of the instalments for February, 2006 and May 2006 the opp.party not properly responded . On 21.6.2006 when he again went to the bank he was directed to meet one T.Karunakara Rao and when he approached him he stated that he would like to inspect the vehicle. Accordingly the complainant brought the vehicle and there upon the said Karunakara Rao took away the vehicle by coercion. Later the complainant came to know that his vehicle was given to some other person who had forged his signature. The complainant has been working as the insurance agent for both to the LIC as well as the New India Assurance Co. and as his vehicle was committed theft he suffered mental agony and also lost his prospects and income. Hence the complainant approached District Forum to direct the opp.party to pay compensation of Rs.2 lakhs and Rs.50,000/- expenses.
The opp.party filed counter denying the various allegations made in the complaint. The opp.party having satisfied with the documents and financiers, the two wheeler loan was sanctioned and the same was disbursed to the complainant. Accordingly the complainant executed the loan cum hypothecation agreement in favour of the opposite party duly signing the same after having fully satisfied with the contents of the agreement. The complainant after availing the loan purchased the two wheeler which has been registered as AP 5 AM 2502 and as per the agreement loan amount was to be repaid in equated monthly instalments . The complainant committed default in paying the instalments for the months of February, April and May 2006 for a sum of Rs.4,356/- After the cheque was dishonoured for the payment due for February,2006 the opposite party informed the same to the complainant in their notice dt.7.3.2006. The Cheques pertaining to April and May,2006 were also dishonoured. The opp.party issued notices dt.7.4.2006 and 7.5.2006 informing the complainant about the dishonouring of both the cheques and directed him to make payment covered by those cheques within the statutory period . The complainant though received the notices did not make the payment and therefore the opp.party seized the vehicle on 22.6.2006 in terms of the agreement. They also gave a police complaint about the pre and post operation seizer of the vehicle After seizer of the vehicle the opp.party gave a pre sale notice to the complainant dt.27.6.2006 informing him to make the payment and cautioning that the vehicle would be sold in auction if he failed to make the payments The said notice was returned with an endorsement that the addressee was not found. On 10.7.2006 one K.Krishna came to the bank with cash and informed that the complainant had sent him to make payment of the entire amount and to get back the vehicle. , but the opp.party did not accept the payment and asked him to bring the customer or atleast an authorisation letter. Accordingly the said Krishna brought authorisation letter and after confirmation on telephone with the complaiannt about the authorisation letter , the opp.party released the vehicle to Krishna after receiving Rs.35,090/- from him . The opposite party stated that there is no deficiency in service on their part and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary costs.
The complainant filed evidence affidavit and documents Exs.A1 to A6 and the opp.party also filed evidence affidavit and documents Exs.B1 to B17. The District Forum based on the evidence adduced and pleadings dismissed the complaint with exemplary costs of Rs.2000/-.
Aggrieved by the said order the complainant preferred this appeal
The point for determination arises in this appeal is whether the order passed by the District Forum is sustainable.
The appellant submits that the Dist.Forum has not properly discussed the evidence on record and also the fact that he worked as insurance agent of LIC as well as New India Assurance company and as his vehicle was committed theft he lost his prospects of income there was deficiency in service on the part of the opp.party and also unfair trade practice . As per Section 3 of the C.P.Act additional remedy is available to him and the order passed by the District Forum may be set aside and the respondent may be directed to pay the damages of Rs.30 lakhs and Rs.5 lakhs towards hardship and mental agony suffered by him. The respondent contended that the District Forum has properly appreciated the evidence on record and the finding of the District Forum may be confirmed.
There is no dispute that the complainant has purchased Hero Honda Motor Cycle by paying some amount by cash . The complainant obtained loan from the opp.party bank and he paid the some of the instalment and thereafter he has defaulted in payment of instalments . It is also an admitted fact that two wheeler vehicle was transferred in the name of one K.Krishna . The appellant contended that he has not issued Ex.B7 , the District Forum has relied on Ex.B7 and the finding of the District Froum is not sustainable. The appellant has taken plea that his friend Krishna has obtained his signatures on blank papers and manipulated Ex.B7 and subsequently the vehicle was re registered in the name of K.Krishna . We have gone through Ex.B7 document which bear the signature of the complainant. If Krishna had obtained signatures of the complainant on the blank papers and manipulated Ex.B7 and when the two wheeler has been transferred to his name, the complainant ought to have given police complaint and also to RTA authorities. The District Forum has elaborately discussed and given finding . The appellant being a party in person filed a complaint by taking inconsistent pleas. The complainant has taken a loan and it has to be repaid in 30 equal instalments at the rate of Rs.1452/- p.m. When the complainant failed to pay the instalments notice was also issued by the opp.party. Ex.B2 notice was received by the complainant . When one Krihsna came and repaid the loan amount on behalf of the complainant the opp.party had released the vehicle to him with the consent of the complainant. Ex.B17. document discloses that the ownership of the vehicle was transferred in the name of Krishna by Additional Registering Authroity Kakinada The District Forum has elaborately discussed all the documentary evidence and given finding that the complainant has filed a false and vexatious complaint and dismissed the complaint with exemplary costs of Rs.2000/- . The appellant submits that the dismissal of the complaint with exemplary costs is not sustainable. The submission made by the appellant is concerned the appellant being a party in person he is not aware with regard to the procedure laid down in filing the complaint. On the other hand the complainant was not having any legal knowledge to file the complaint. The District Forum has taken a harsh view in imposing exemplary costs of Rs.2000/-
In the result appeal is partly allowed Order of the District Forum with regard to imposition of exemplary costs of Rs.2000/- is set aside. In all other aspects order of the District Forum is confirmed. In the circumstances without costs.
PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER MALE MEMBER
Dt.31.7.2008
Pm-
