By Smt. Saji Mathew, Member:

The gist of the case is as follows:-

The Complainant has availed loan from the 1^st Opposite Party for his vehicle bearing registration No.KL 12/ 5954 through the agent of 1^st Opposite Party. The loan period was from 22.04.2001 to 02.03.2004. The Complainant has to repay Rs.1,24,000/- within this period. Accordingly instalments were fixed and repayment chart was given to the Complainant. The Complainant has paid the entire loan amount even before the prescribed date. But the 1^st Opposite Party refused to issue No Objection Certificate for loan endorsement cancellation and demanded a further payment of Rs.15,950/-. The Complainant could not renew the taxi permit due to the deficiency in service on the side of the 1^st Opposite Party. Therefore, the Complainant prays for an order directing the Opposite Party to issue clearance certificate for the vehicle and not to collect any further amount from the Complainant as penal charges. The Complainant also prays that there may be an order directing the 2^nd Opposite Party to cancel the hypothecation endorsement of vehicle No. KL 12/5954 and not to levy any penal charges or fine for the delay for the renewal of taxi permit of the vehicle No. KL 12/5954.

2. The 1^st Opposite Party even though received notice, has not appeared or filed version. Hence 1^st Opposite Party was declared exparte. 2^nd Opposite Party filed their version stating that they can cancel the loan endorsement on the application of the Complainant made in form 35 duly signed by the R.C. Owner and the Financier with appropriate fee. Here the Complainant has not submitted any such application.

3. The Complainant filed proof affidavit and documents were marked as Ext.A1 series and Ext.A2 series.

4. The points to be decided are:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for any relief?

5. Point No.1:- The Complainant states that he has paid the entire loan amount of Rs. 1,24,000/- within the agreement period. But receipts show payment of only Rs.1,17,000/-. As per Ext.A1 series 23^rd instalment was paid on 13.6.2003. Then on 17.10.2003, Rs.36,500/- was paid. The receipt issued on 17.10.2003 does not show for which instalments the amount was credited. This makes the entire dealing arbitrary. The Opposite Party should have shown the number of instalments to which the amount is credited. That would have made a fair deal. Hence the point No.1 is held against the 1^st Opposite Party.

6. Point No.2:- In this case, it is seen that a lump-sum amount of Rs.36,500/- is paid on 17.10.2003. The receipt does not show towards which instalments the amount is credited. The 1^st Opposite Party did not appear to explain the matter. Hence the contention of complainant that the entire amount is paid before the agreement period is taken as true. Therefore, the Complainant is entitled to get the no objection certificate for the cancellation of loan endorsement in the R.C.

Therefore the complaint is partly allowed and the 1^st Opposite Party is directed to issue no objection certificate for the clearance of loan endorsement in the R.C of the vehicle No. KL 12/5954. No order as against the 2^nd Opposite Party. No order as to cost or compensation.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 31^st March 2010.

PRESIDENT: Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

APPENDIX

Witnesses for the Complainant:

Nil.

Witnesses for the Opposite Party:

Nil.

Exhibits for the Complainant:

A1 series. Receipts.

A2 series. Receipts.

Exhibits for the Opposite Party:

Nil.