IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Thursday the 30th day of September, 2010
Filed on 09.02.09
Present
- Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
- Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
- Smt. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.57/09
between
Complainant:- Opposite Party:-
Sri.Sreeni, M/s.Muthoot Leasing and Finance Ltd.,
S/o Ramachandran Nair, 1st Floor, St.Antony’s Building,
Thaivechidathu Veettil, District Court Ward, Alappuzha,
Pathirappally.P.O., Rep. by its Manager.
Chettykadu, Alappuzha. (By Adv.Vidhu M Unnithan)
(By Adv.R.Rajendra Prasad)
O R D E R
SRI.JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT)
The complainant’s case in a nutshell is as follows: - The complainant, on 21st August 2004 availed a loan amount of Rs.2,74,000/-(Rupees two lacs seventy four thousand only) from the opposite party. At the time of availing the said loan, the complainant issued to the opposite party 20 blank cheque leaves, property tax receipt and identification documents. As per the terms and condition of the loan scheme, the complainant is to pay off the loan amount by remitting an EMI amount of Rs.5,595/-(Rupees five thousand five hundred and ninety five only) for 60 months viz. a total amount of Rs.3,35,700/-(Rupees three lacs thirty five thousand seven hundred only). In line with the terms of the loan, the complainant without any default remitted the amount of Rs.5,595/-(Rupees five thousand five hundred and ninety five only) for 39 months viz. a total amount of Rs.2,18,205/-(Rupees two lacs eighteen thousand two hundred and five only). Thereafter, the complainant failed to payoff the loan amount due to unforeseen business twist. When matters stood thus, the opposite party on 14th July 2008 caused to send a lawyer's notice to the complainant calling upon him to pay an amount of Rs.1,50,248/-(Rupees one lac fifty thousand two hundred and forty eight only). In the mean time payoff, on 10th September 2009, the complainant surrendered the vehicle with the opposite party, when the amount due to the opposite party was Rs.62,488/-(Rupees sixty two thousand four hundred and eighty eight only). On 4th November 2008, the said vehicle was sold out to one Mr. Sunny for an amount of Rs.90,000/-(Rupees ninety thousand only). Thus the opposite party got hold of an excess amount of Rs.27,5l2/-(Rupees twenty seven thousand five hundred and twelve only) from the complainant. Got aggrieved on this the opposite party approached this Forum for compensation and relief.
1. On notice being sent, the opposite party turned up and filed version. The contention of the opposite party is that according to the loan agreement, the complainant had to remit an EMI amount of Rs.5,595/-(Rupees five thousand five hundred and ninety five only) for 59 months, and an amount of Rs.60,052/-(Rupees sixty thousand and fifty two only) as the last (60th) installment. In the said manner, the complainant was liable to pay an amount of Rs.3,90,157/-(Rupees three lacs ninety thousand one hundred and fifty seven only), and not Rs.3,35,700/-(Rupees three lacs thirty five thousand and seven hundred only), the opposite party contends. The complainant has never entrusted any blank cheque or other documents with the opposite party. The opposite party was constrained to file a case U/S 138 of NI Act consequent to the cheque issued by the complainant being dishonored. The sale proceeds Rs.90,000/-(Rupees ninety thousand only) was adjusted with the amount the complainant due to the opposite party. Still thereafter, the complainant caused default of payment. As per the loan agreement, this Forum has no jurisdiction. The complainant is disentitled to any relief. The complaint is only to be dismissed with cost to the opposite party, the opposite arty asserts.
2. The complainant’s evidence consists of the testimony of the complainant himself as PW1, and the documents Exbts. Al to A4 were marked. On the side of the opposite party, the power of Attorney holder of the complainant was examined as RW1, and the documents Exbts. B1 to B5 were marked.
3. Keeping in view the contentions of both the parties, the questions that come up before us for consideration are:-
(1) Whether this Forum has jurisdiction to entertain the instant complaint?
(2) If the opposite party committed any deficiency of service?
(3) Cost and compensation if any?
4. Before going into the merit of the present complaint, we feel it proper to look into the contention raised by the opposite party as to the jurisdiction of this Forum to entertain the instant complaint. We have already categorically observed on several available occasions that when the dispute is with regard to the deficiency of service, nothing bars this Forum to sit in judgment as to the same. On plain perusal of the complainant, it is come out that the issue raised by the complainant is in respect of the service deficiency of the opposite party. In the light of the question raised by the opposite party, it goes with out saying that this Forum has jurisdiction to adjudicate the present complaint.
5. Coming down to the merit of the case, it appears that the opposite party has not denied or disputed the loan amount, the complainant's surrender of vehicle. It is worthwhile to notice that concededly the vehicle was sold out for an amount of Rs.90,000/-(Rupees ninety thousand only), and the same was adjusted to the outstanding loan amount. At the same time, the opposite party has seriously disputed of amount claimed to have been remitted by the complainant. According to the opposite party, the complainant has to pay off an EMI amount of Rs.5,595/-(Rupees five thousand five hundred and ninety five only) for 59 months, and an amount of Rs.60,052/-(Rupees sixty thousand and fifty two only) as the last (60th) installment. The complainant caused default in payment of the loan amount, and on demanding the due amount, the complainant issued a cheque for an amount of Rs.1,50,248/-(Rupees one lac fifty thousand two hundred and forty eight only), the opposite party fervently contends. Bearing this contention alive in our mind, we anxiously went through the materials brought on record by the parties. We perused the pleadings, affidavits and other evidences available on record. It seems that the opposite party keeps conspicuously silent with regard to the amount actually the complainant paid off. The opposite party is appears to have been equally quiet with regard to the number of installments the complainant made payments, the number of installments outstanding, and above all on what date or context the complainant issued the cheque for an amount of Rs.1,50,248/-(Rupees one lac fifty thousand two hundred and forty eight only) to the opposite party. In the wake of this strange conduct of the opposite party it is obviously to be presumed that the opposite party has something material to suppress or to conceal from the focus of this Forum. We are of the considered view that the manner in which the opposite party approached this case palpably cast a cloud of suspicion in the opposite party’s case. On the other hand, the complainant’s case is consistent, which stands unrebutted. Needless to say the opposite party adopts no meaningful steps to disprove case advanced by the complainant. Obviously, the opposite party committed deficiency of service and handed out hardships to the complainant. In this backdrop, we have no course open but to accept the complainant case. At the same time, it is worthy of notice that the complainant hasn't let in any evidence to show that if any excess amount was with the opposite party.
For the forgoing facts and circumstance of the case, the opposite party is directed to pay the complainant an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation and an amount of Rs.1,500/-(Rupees one thousand and five hundred only) as cost.
Complaint stands disposed accordingly.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of September, 2010.
Sd/-Sri. Jimmy Korah
Sd/-Sri. K. Anirudhan
Sd/-Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Sreeni.R (Witness)
Ext. A1 - Copy of the Letter to the opposite party dated, 10.09.2008
Ext.A2 - Provisional Receipt dated, 04.11.2008 for an amount of Rs.90,000/-
Ext. A3 - Advocate Notice dated, 14.07.2008
Ext. A4 series - Status Report as on 08.08.2008 (4 pages)
Evidence of the opposite party:-
RW1 - Roshy Thomas (Witness)
Ext. B1 - Repayment Schedule
Ext. B2 - Hypothecation Finance details dated, 21.08.2004
Ext. B3 - Copy of the Certificate issued by the opposite party dated, 11.01.2010
Ext. B4 - Repayment Schedule dated, 21.08.2004 (2 pages)
Ext. B5 - Copy of the General Power of Attorney (3 pages)
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F.
Typed by:- P.R/-
Compared by:-
