BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOZHIKODE.

C.C.401/2011

Dated this the 7^th day of August 2012.

 

            ( Present: Sri. G. Yadunadhan, B.A., LLB.                              : President)

                             Smt. Jayasree Kallat, M.A.                                       : Member

                             Sri. L. Jyothikumar, B.A., LLB.                                  : Member

 

 

ORDER

 

By G. Yadunadhan, President:

 

            The petition was filed on 18-10-2011. The case of the complainant is that the complainant had availed a loan facility from the opposite party with respect to the vehicle No. KL 18 D-1731 with condition that the principal amount and its interest shall be paid in monthly instalments. The complainant had altogether paid Rs.27000/- by way of instalments towards the amount due to the respondents. Mean while the complainant got some funds at his disposal and accordingly he approached the second respondent  on 29-6-10 expressing his desire to close the above mentioned account prematurely. Therefore 2^nd respondent demanded an exorbitant amount for prematurely closing the above loan account which included over due interest and various other expenses under different heads. Complainant had not conceded to the demand made by the respondent as a result the loan became default. The complainant was always ready and willing to pay the actual amount and interest payable in the above loan and to get the loan cancelled. Further the respondent had arbitrarily refused to accept the amount and insisted the payment of the exorbitant amount. The second  respondent had further threatened the complainant that the said vehicle will be seized at any cost and the same will have to be met by the complainant. The respondent’s employees used to threaten to complainant’s family through telephone calls also. The respondents motive is to coerce the complainant to settle the matter and pay the exorbitant amount claimed by them. Thereafter the complainant caused the issuance of a lawyer notice dated 29-7-2011 to the respondent dating the facts and expressing his willingness to settle the matter and pay the amount to which they are legally entitled. The entire action of the respondent is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The respondent has no right to insist the complainant to pay over due interest and compensation for the premature closure of the said loan account. Therefore the complainant is seeking relief against the opposite party directing them to accept the actual amount due including nominal interest and also pay a compensation of Rs.50000/-.

 

            Opposite party after serving notice entered in appearance and filed their version stating that the transaction between the complainant and the opposite parties regarding the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-18-D-1731 is admuitted. It is submitted that the original loan sanctioned and disbursed by the opposite party shall be repayable along with interest and other charges within the statutory period in instalments as agreed. The complainant is very well aware of the default in payment of the instalments and the consequent accumulation of the instalments etc. It is submitted that the attempt of the complainant is now to escape from the liability to the opposite parties. An amount of Rs.1,86,854/- remain due and payable by the complainant. Therefore it is prayed that after accepting the contentions of this opposite parties, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

 

            Points for consideration (1) Whether any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party? (2) If so what is the relief and cost?

 

            Complainant continuously absent for the last several postings. Hence matter taken for orders on merit. The complainant was not examined or produced any evidence to substantiate their case. Since the complainant  deliberately failed to appear before this Fora, fora cannot go with the complaint alone without convincing the facts of the case. Perusing the complaint alone complainant has failed to prove their case due to lack of evidence. Therefore complaint is liable to be dismissed without any costs.

 

Pronounced in the open court this the 7^th day of August 2012.

Date of filing:18.10.2011.

 

 

            SD/-PRESIDENT                    SD/-MEMBER                        SD/-MEMBER

 

//True copy//

 

(Forwarded/By Order)

 

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT