Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/03/2014

S.Balasubramanian - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Tata Motor Finance Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

R.Vijayaragaven

04 Dec 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 13.12.2013

                                                                          Date of Order : 04.12.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                : MEMBER-I

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP., : MEMBER-II

 

C.C. No.03/2014

DATED THIS TUESDAY THE 04^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018

                                 

S. Balasubramanian,

S/o. Mr. Shanmuga Thevar,

Karthik Traders,

Old No.5, New No.9, Vergheesh Avenue,

Ashok Nagar,

Chennai – 600 083.                                                      .. Complainant.                                                 

 

         ..Versus..

 

1. M/s. Tata Motors Ltd.,

Rep. by its Manager,

Regd. Office:-

Bombay House,

No.24, Homi Mody Street,

Fort,

Bombay – 400 001.

Inter Alia Office:-

Building A, 2^nd Floor,

Lodha 1-Think Techno Campus,

Off: Pokhran Road 2,

Thane West – 400 607.

 

2. Tata Motors Finance Ltd.,

Rep. by its Authorised Signatory,

M.T. Rajens Properties,

No.40, Basullah Road,

T. Nagar,

Chennai – 600 017.                                                 ..  Opposite parties.

          

Counsel for complainant                 :  M/s. R. Vijayaraghaven & others

Counsel for opposite parties 1 & 2 :  M/s. S. Namasivayam & others

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to issue NOC as per their letter dated:22.06.2011 and to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for financial loss, mental agony and harassment with cost to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he purchased a vehicle TATA ACE bearing Registration No.TN 09 AY 4297 for his livelihood.  The complainant availed loan from the opposite party under Hire Purchase Scheme.   The complainant paid initial amount of Rs.43,459/-.   The opposite party financed a sum of Rs.2,46,000/-.  The opposite party made a contract value to the tune of Rs.3,13,880/- including financial charges of Rs.64,880/- to be repayable in 35 equal monthly instalments at the rate of Rs.8,990/- each.  The complainant paid all the amount except 2 instalments.   While so, on 13.06.2011, the Goondas of the opposite party intercepted the vehicle at Spurtank Road, Chetput and thrown away the goods in the vehicle and taken away the vehicle.  Immediately on information, the complainant lodged a complaint before G7, Chetput Police Station.   The Police issued CSR on 15.06.2011.   The Police called the 2^nd opposite party and on enquiry, the 2^nd opposite party admitted the repossession of the vehicle.  After due negotiation, the 2^nd opposite party agreed to receive a sum of Rs.27,950/- towards full and final settlement of the amount due.   The complainant also paid the said amount of Rs.27,950/-  and the opposite party issued a letter dated:22.06.2011 acknowledging the payment as full and final settlement.  Thereafter, evenafter repeated requests and demands, the opposite parties has not issued ‘No Objection Certificate’ for cancellation of hypothecation endorsement and made harassment.   Therefore, the complainant issued legal notice dated:12.01.2013 but the opposite parties neither replied nor come forward to settle the demands of the complainant.   Thereafter, this complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite parties is as follows:

The opposite parties specifically deny each and every allegations made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.     The opposite parties 1 & 2 state that the complainant purchased the vehicle for commercial purpose.   Hence as per the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the complaint is not sustainable.  The opposite parties 1 & 2 state that the complainant has filed this complaint only to evade the repayment of the outstanding amount of Rs.53,657.61 as on 13.11.2014.  The opposite parties state that on 22.06.2011 after negotiations, the 2^nd opposite party agreed to receive a sum of Rs.27,950/- being the full and final settlement of all the amounts due from the complainant in respect of the said loan amount are denied as false since the amount due was more than Rs.27,950/- and only the State Legal Head / Branch Manager alone having authority to negotiate in matters of final settlement and issue NOC.  Mr. P. Vijayakannan, the Deputy Manager has collected Rs.27,950/- only as part payment towards the balance due and had issued a receipt accordingly.  As a matter of good faith, the vehicle was returned to the complainant on the same day.  Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.    To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is filed and documents Ex.B1 & Ex.B2 are marked on the side of the opposite parties 1 & 2.      

4.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to ‘No Objection Certificate’ as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation of financial loss, mental agony and harassment with cost as prayed for?

5.      On point:-

Both parties filed their respective written arguments. Heard the complainant’s  Counsel.  Perused the records namely; the complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.  Admittedly, the complainant  purchased a vehicle TATA ACE bearing Registration No.TN 09 AY 4297 for his livelihood as per Ex.A1.  The complainant availed loan from the opposite party under Hire Purchase Agreement.   The complainant paid initial amount of Rs.43,459/-.   The opposite party financed a sum of Rs.2,46,000/-.  The opposite party made a contract value to the tune of Rs.3,13,880/- including financial charges of Rs.64,880/- to be repayable in 35 equal monthly instalments at the rate of Rs.8,990/- each.  The complainant paid all the amount except two instalments.   While so, on 13.06.2011, the Goondas of the opposite party intercepted the vehicle at Spurtank Road, Chetput and thrown away the goods in the vehicle and repossessed the vehicle.  Immediately on information, the complainant lodged a complaint before G7, Chetput Police Station.   The Police issued CSR on 15.06.2011 as per Ex.A3.   The Police called the 2^nd opposite party.   On enquiry, the 2^nd opposite party admitted the repossession of the vehicle.  After due negotiation, the 2^nd opposite party agreed to receive a sum of Rs.27,950/- towards full and final settlement of the amount due.   The complainant also paid the said amount of Rs.27,950/-  as per Ex.A4 and the opposite party issued a letter dated:22.06.2011 acknowledging the payment as full and final settlement.  Evenafter repeated requests and demands, the opposite parties has not issued ‘No Objection Certificate’ for cancellation of hypothecation endorsement and made harassment by quashing the legal validity of the vehicle which infringed the day to day livelihood proves the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.  Since the opposite parties has not come forward to issue ‘No Objection Certificate’, the complainant filed this case claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- with cost.

6.     The contention the opposite parties 1 & 2 is that the complainant purchased the vehicle for commercial purpose.  Hence as per the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the complaint is not sustainable.   But it is seen from the records that the complainant purchased the vehicle only for his livelihood.  Further the contention of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is that the complainant has filed this complaint only to evade the repayment of the outstanding amount of Rs.53,657.61 as on 13.11.2014.    But the opposite parties has not produced any document to prove that there was a due on and after 22.06.2011 as per Ex.A5.  The statement of accounts Ex.B2 dated:13.04.2014 is the outcome of afterthought of filing of this complaint.   Further the contention of the opposite parties is that the amount due was more than Rs.27,950/- and only the State Legal Head / Branch Manager alone having authority to negotiate in the matters of final settlement and issue NOC.  Mr. P. Vijayakannan, the Deputy Manager has collected Rs.27,950/- as part payment.    But on a careful perusal of Ex.A5, it is very clear that after due negotiation, the matter was settled for a sum of Rs.27,950/- and the opposite parties have agreed to issue NOC.  Even after receipt of the amount and agreed to issue NOC, the opposite parties has not come forward to issue NOC which amounts to deficiency in service.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties shall issue ‘No Objection Certificate’ to the complainant with a compensation of Rs.15,000/- and cost of Rs.5,000/-.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally directed to issue ‘No Objection with clearance Certificate’ to the complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.

The aboveamounts shall be payablewithin six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 04^th day of December 2018. 

 

MEMBER-I                           MEMBER-II                    PRESIDENT

 

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

		Copy of contract letter
		Copy of letter of repossessions
		Copy of C.S.R.
		Copy of receipt for payment of Rs.24,950/- as full and final settlement
		Copy of letter of the Deputy Manager of the opposite party
		Copy of notice from the opposite party through his Advocate

 

OPPOSITE  PARTIES SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

		Copy of Power of Attorney
		Statement of Accounts

 

 

MEMBER-I                           MEMBER-I I                     PRESIDENT