Kerala

Alappuzha

CC/162/2007

Sambu Embran - Complainant(s)

Versus

Proprietor,ICICI Bank - Opp.Party(s)

B.Suresh

25 Apr 2008

ORDER


Alappuzha
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ,BAZAR P.O
Execution Application(EA) No. CC/162/2007

Sambu Embran
ICICI Bank ,Proprietor
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Proprietor,ICICI Bank
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. JIMMY KORAH 2. K.Anirudhan 3. Smt;Shajitha Beevi

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

SRI. JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT) The case of the complainant is that he availed a loan from opposite parties, ICICI bank for purchasing vehicle No.KL-3/K-1458. There after as per the advice of the opposite party complainant handed over the R.C. Book and other papers of the said vehicle to the officials of the opposite parties. He also paid 4 installments of repayment to the opposite parties. The opposite parties have agreed that they will change the ownership particulars in the R.C. Book in favour of the complainant. The complainant made several request for the return of the R.C. Book and other papers. But opposite party has not cared. On 12.3.07 complainant issued a lawyers’ notice. Even they were not cared the complaint of the complainant. 2. The 2nd opposite party filed version stating that the complainant has not submitted or entrusted the R.C. Book and other papers to the 2nd opposite party. It is the duty of the complainant to change the ownership in the R.C. Book in his name. First opposite party is an agent of the 2nd opposite party. Hence complaint may be dismissed. 3. The 1st opposite party filed version contending that it is the duty of the complainant to change the ownership of the vehicle in R.C. Book. As per the request of the complainant 1st opposite party agreed to make necessary arrangements to get the name changed in the R.C. Book and to make H.P. endorsements through an auto consultancy. Accordingly the 1st opposite party handed over the documents of the said vehicle to an auto consultant. The complainant has not given the bill amount requested by the auto consultant. Hence these documents retained by the 1st opposite party. 4. Considering the contentions of the complainant and opposite parties this Forum raised the following issues:- Whether the complainant is entitled for claim amount and compensation from the opposite parties establishing the deficiency as averred in the complaint? 5. Complainant produced 10 documents and they are marked as Exts.A1 to A10. From the version of the 1st opposite party it can be seen that the documents are with them. They were made necessary endorsements through Regional Transport Office on the request of the complainant through an auto consultancy. But the complainant has not paid the bill amount. The first opposite party has not stated what the bill amount even in the version. That means they were dealt the grievance complaint in a negligent manner. In paragraph 6 of the version of the opposite parties it was written as “Bill for Rs………….towards fees, expenses and service charges. This opposite party effected payment of Rs…………to the auto consultant”. This shows that opposite parties are not aware about the bill amount even then they agreed for service to the complainant. They were not taken care for stating the bill amount even in the version. This is a deficiency in service. First opposite party has under taken that they are ready to hand over the documents on payment of bill amount. We are also helpless to direct the complainant to pay the bill amount without knowing the actual bill amount. In the result we directed the opposite parties to hand over all the documents of the vehicle No. KL-3/K-1458 as stated in the complaint to the complainant within 30 days of the receipt of this order without receipt of any amount. Regarding the claim of consequential loss this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain such reliefs. We also directed the opposite parties 1 and 2 to pay Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) as cost of this proceedings to the complainant. Complaint allowed. Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of April, 2008. Sd/- SRI. JIMMY KORAH : Sd/- SRI. K. ANIRUDHAN : Sd/- SMT. N. SHAJITHA BEEVI : APPENDIX:- Evidence of the complainant:- Ext.A1 - Photo copy of the Certificate of Registration Ext.A2 - Form D 1 (Photo copy) Ext.A3 - Cheque for Rs.1,00,630/- (Photo copy) Ext.A4 - Photo copy of the statement Ext.A5 - Pollution under control certificate (Photo copy) Ext.A6 & A7 - Photo copy of the Savings bank a/c pass book Ext.A8 - Notice dated 12.3.2007 (Photo copy) Ext.A9 - Photo copy of the postal receipts Ext.A10 - Photo copy of the acknowledgement cards Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil // True Copy // By Order Senior Superintendent To Complainant/Oppo.parties/S.F. Typed by:-pr/- Compared by:-




......................JIMMY KORAH
......................K.Anirudhan
......................Smt;Shajitha Beevi