Kerala

Malappuram

OP/04/20

UMMALHASANATH T.P, D/O ABU HAJI - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S MANAPPURAM, GENERAL FINANCE AND LEASING LIMITED - Opp.Party(s)

V.K SATHEESH, THOMAS BABU

16 Apr 2008

ORDER


DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
MALAPPURAM
consumer case(CC) No. OP/04/20

UMMALHASANATH T.P, D/O ABU HAJI
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

M/S MANAPPURAM, GENERAL FINANCE AND LEASING LIMITED
M/S MANAPPURAM, GENERAL FINANCE AND LEASING LIMITED
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. AYISHAKUTTY. E 2. C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President, 1. Complainant is aggrieved that opposite party has not issued the hire purchase termination letter even after repayment of the finance availed from 1st opposite party. 2. Opposite parties filed joint version admitting the transaction. It is stated that complainant was a chronic defaulter in payment of instalments. That complainant is liable to pay Rs.13,252/- as additional hire charges and bank charges. On payment of the said amount opposite party is willing to issue the Clearance Certificate. 3. Evidence in this case consists of affidavits filed by both sides. Exts.A1 to A5 marked on the side of complainant. Exts.B1 to B3 marked on behalf of opposite party. 4. According to complainant she has paid all the full amount as per the hire purchase agreement. Ext.A1 is the photo copy of Repayment Schedule. As per Ext.A1 the amount financed is Rs.2,30,000/-. The total amount to be repaid is Rs.3,05,196/-. The instalments are equated into 12 instalments of Rs.8,333/- per month and 24 instalments of Rs.8,550/- per month. The due date is 24th of every month. Ext.A2 is the Lease Instalment Payment Book. It shows complainant has repaid all 36 instalments. Exts.A3 series are the receipts for the payments. According to opposite parties complainant made delay in payment of instalments and is liable to pay additional hire charges, as per the hire purchase agreement. Ext.B2 is the hire purchase agreement. Clause 16 in Ext.B2 reads that complainant shall pay additional finance charges @ 36% per annum in default of payment of instalment. Ext.B3 is the statement of accounts. It shows that opposite party has debited additional hire charges several times at the time of repayment of instalments. As per Ext.A2 there is a delay of one month in repaying the last instalment. Opposite parties claim Rs.13,252/- as additional charges and bank charges. This claim has to be appreciated taking into consideration of the fact that the instalments were fixed adding interest @ 24% to the principal amount from the date of debt to the last instalment. So the claim for additional hire charges in actually interest upon interest which is not allowable by law. Further while paying the last instalment opposite party has appropriated the amount towards instalment and not towards additional hire charges. As per Sec. 60 of Contract Act when there is no definite agreement as to appropriation the amount repaid has to be first applied to interest and only then to the principal. The consequence of not adhering to this general rule would be waiver of the right to claim the interest. Opposite parties consciously did not appropriate the last payment towards the said 36% interest and are thus estopped from claiming it any further. From the above discussions we are of the view that complainant is not liable to pay any further amount to opposite parties. We find the act of opposite parties not issuing the Clearance Certificate and claiming illegal sum is deficiency in service. 5. In the result, complaint allowed. We order 1st opposite party to issue the Hire Purchase Termination Letter in respect of vehicle No.KL-10 G 9754 in favour of complainant, within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which on request by complainant a copy of this order will be communicated to the concerned Regional Transport Officer who on receipt of copy of this order shall cancel the endorsement in favour of opposite party in the Registration Certificate of vehicle No.KL-10 G-9754. Dated this 16th day of April, 2008. C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER APPENDIX Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A5 Ext.A1 : Photo copy of the repayment schedule dated, 24-11-1998 by opposite party to complainant. Ext.A2 : Photo copy of the Pass Book in favour of complainant. Ext.A3 : Photo copy of the receipts (34 Nos.) from opposite party to complainant. Ext.A4 : Photo copy of the Registered post with A/D sent by complainant's counsel to opposite parties. Ext.A5 : Photo copy of the reply notice dated, 01-01-04 sent by 1st opposite party complainant's counsel. Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1 to B3 Ext.B1 : Extract from the Minutes of the Meeting of Board of Directors of 1st opposite party. Ext.B2 : Hire Purchase Agreement for New Vehicle between the second opposite party and complainant. Ext.B3 : Photo copy of the statement of accounts dated, 26-3-2004 by opposite party to complainant. C. S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER




......................AYISHAKUTTY. E
......................C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI