ADV. RAVI SUSHA, MEMBER.

            Complainant has filed this case for getting  back his R.C. book,. Duplicate key, NOC  of  his vehicle and for compensation.

The contents of the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows:

The complainant purchased a Bajaj Motor Bike from the 1^st opp.party.  The 1^st opp.party arranged finance at 0% interest rate.   At the time of delivery of the vehicle the 1^st opp.party had  kept the R.C.  book and duplicate key of the vehicle in their custody on a condition that the same will be returned back at the time of repayment of entire instalments.   The deems of the  repayment of  the loan was that the amount should be paid with 18 equal instalment of Rs.1667/-.  The complainant has given 18 post dated  cheque for an amount of Rs.1667/- each.  All the cheques were honoured except 9^th  and 15^th instalments.   After knowing the dishonour of the said cheques, the complainant directly remitted the 9^th and 15^th instalments immediately.  When the complainant approached the 1^st opp.party for getting the R.C. Book, Duplicate key and NOC, the 1^st opp.party demanded Rs.700/- as bank charges for the dishonour of 2 cheques.   The said demand of the 1^st opp.party is illegal and deficiency in service.  Hence the complainant filed the complaint for getting relief.

          The 1^st opp.party filed version contending, interalia, that the complainant is not maintainable either in law or on  facts.The 1^st opp.party is not engaged in any type of money lending business.  The opp.party party is only the authorized dealer of Bajaj Make Motor Cycle.  It is admitted that the complainant purchased a Bajaj Boxer Motor Cycle from the opp.party.   The allegation in the said para that the 1^st opp.party arranged financial assistance for the purchase of the motor cycle and obtained cheque leaves, original Registration Certificate and Duplicate key from the complainant is false and hence denied.  In fact the complaint availed a loan from the M/s. Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. and executed documents in favour of them.  The opp.party is no way connected with the said transaction and not aware of the terms and conditions thereof.  All the allegations against these facts are utter falsehood and hence denied.  The  opp.party had no financial transaction with the complainant and the opp.party had not retain any records belong to the complainant.  The complaint is filed without any bonafides and with an intent to harass and injure the opp.party.  Hence the opp.party prays to dismiss the complaint.

          The 2^nd opp.party filed a version contending as follows:  The complaint is not maintainable.   The complainant entered into a hire purchase agreement with 2^nd opp.party, Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. Kollam.   The complainant himself approached the Bajaj Auto Finance Company for hire purchase for the vehicle.  Cheque NO.400210 dated 5.9.2004 and cheque No.400215 dated 5.2.2005 were bounced and return ed with the reason funds insufficient and towards bouncing charge of Rs.350/- per cheque the complainant is liable to pay Rs.700/- to the 2^nd opp.party and then only the 2^nd opp.party can issue NOC, Duplicate Key and RC of the vehicle.   As per the agreement the complainant is liable to pay charges for cheque bouncing to the 2^nd opp.party..  The 2^nd opp.party has not done any unfair trade practice or deficiency of service to the complainant.   If the complainant is paying the due amount of Rs.700/- to the 2^nd opp.party the 2^nd opp.party can issue the NOC and duplicate and records of the vehicle.  Hence the 2^nd opp.party prays to dismiss the complaint.

          Points that would arise for consideration are:

1.     Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties

2.       Reliefs and costs.

For the complainant PW.1 is examined.   Ext. P1 to P3 are marked.

Opp.party is  not examined.   Ext. D1 to D3 are marked.

Points:

The complainant’s case is that he purchased a Bajaj Boxer motor Bike from the 1^st opp.party.  1^st opp.party has kept the R.C Book and duplicate key of the vehicle till the time of repayment of entire instalments.   The 9^th and 15^th instalments cheques were  dishonoured .  1^st opp.party demanded  Rs.700/- as dishonour charges and did not return the R.C book , key and NOC.  The said action is illegal.

          After the version of 1^st opp.party the complainant filed impleading petition and impleaded the 2^nd additional opp.party.  The 2^nd  additional opp.party also filed separate version.  2^nd opp.party produced Hire purchase agreement Ext. D3 executed between the complainant and 2^nd additional opp.party.   2^nd additional opp.party also produced Ext. D1 the R.C. Book in which also there is an endorsement that the motor vehicle is subject to the Hire Purchase agreement with 2^nd opp.party.   When an agreement is executed the parties are liable to comply the conditions of agreement.  The dispute arising in respect of Hire Purchase Agreement shall not come  with the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act and hence the complainant is not a consumer

          The complainant himself admitted in the complaint that he has defaulted 2 instalments.   From the entire evidence we are of the view that the complainant is liable to pay the penal charges for default

In the result as the complainant is not a consumer the complaint is hereby dismissed.  There is no order as to cost.

Dated this the       30^th    day of March, 2009.

I N D E X

List of witnesses for the complainant

PW.1. – Manoj Kumar

List of documents for the complainant

P1. – Advocate notice

P2. – Acknowledgement card

P3. – Documents for loan

List witnesses for the opp.party: NIL

List of documents for the opp.party

D1. – Certificate of Registration of Motor Vehicles

D2. – Customer statement as on 29.2.2008

D3. - Agreement