<br /> COMPLAINT FILED: 30.10.2008<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> <br /> 25th NOVEMBER 2008<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESENT :- SRI. A.M. BENNUR PRESIDENT <br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.2331/2008<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINANT Sri.S.J.Chandra Prakash,S/o S.Jawanmal,Hindu, Major,R/a No.33, 1st floor,‘C’ Street, Fort,Bangalore – 560 002.Advocate – Sri.Ravi Shankar SV/s.<br /> OPPOSITE PARTY Reliance Capital Limited.,No.43, St.John’s Road,1st Floor, G.N Complex,Bangalore – 560 042.Rep. by Prem Aaron,Asst. Sales Manager, Car loans.<br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to pay a sum of Rs.11,978/- with interest and for such other relief’s on an allegations of deficiency in service. <br /> <br /> The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under:<br /> <br /> Complainant with a fond hope of purchasing the used Car approached the OP for the used car loan on 22.02.2008. OP sanctioned the said loan of Rs.3,05,000/- on 23.02.2008. But due to some inconvenience complainant was unable to purchase the said vehicle, hence he did not draw the loan amount sanctioned by the OP. Actually OP has not disbursed the said loan amount in favour of the complainant. When such being the case to the utter shock and surprise of the complainant, OP released Rs.11,069/- through ECS in favour of Silver Star Motors Mart Pvt Ltd. Complainant never authorized the OP to disburse the said amount. With all that OP raised the bill claiming an amount of Rs.3,14,414-93 towards the closure of the account. As the complainant was unable to purchase the said vehicle he intimated the OP to close the account. Ultimately OP closed the account on 17.04.2008. In the mean time collected the cheque bounce charges of Rs.909-54 and failed to credit the alleged first installment of Rs.11,069/-. Being fed up with the hostile attitude of the OP, complainant caused the legal notice on 07.07.2008. Again there was no response. Thus complainant felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP. For no fault of his, he is made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint and sought for the reliefs accordingly.<br /> <br /> 2. On admission and registration of the complaint, notices were sent to the OP. Though OP is duly served with the notice remained absent without any sufficient reason or cause. The absence of the OP does not appear to be as bona fide and reasonable. Hence OP is placed Ex-parte.<br /> <br /> 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed the affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP didn’t participate in the proceedings. Then the arguments were heard.<br /> <br /> 4. It is the case of the complainant that he with a fond hope to purchase used car approached the OP for sanction of used car loan on 22.02.2008 and OP sanctioned Rs.3,05,000/- on 23.02.2008. Complainant did not draw the said loan amount as a negotiation to purchase the used car with Silver Star Motors Mart Pvt. Ltd., failed. Actually OP has not disbursed the said loan amount in favour of the complainant. With all that first installment of Rs.11,069/- was debited in favour of the OP through ECS clearance. On enquiry complainant learnt that OP has issued a cheque in favour of Silver Star Motors Mart Pvt Ltd. Complainant never authorized the OP to do the same. Not only that OP collected Rs.909-54 towards the cheque bounce charges, which is also illegal.<br /> <br /> 5. When complainant expressed his willingness to close the account OP raised the bill for Rs.3,14,414-93 on 26.03.2008 which is arbitrary. Ultimately on 17.04.2008 loan account was closed but still the amount of Rs.11,069/- and Rs.909-54 are not re credited to his account. Thus complainant felt deficiency in service and issued legal notice on 07.07.2008. There was no proper response.<br /> <br /> 6. On the perusal of the documents produced by the complainant, OP has replied the legal notice. On the perusal of the reply dated 26.08.2008 it appears complainant has suppressed certain material facts which are well within his knowledge. As per the request of the complainant, OP sanctioned the loan and cleared loan repayable in 36 EMI. It further discloses that the vehicle was hypothecated in its name and complainant agreed to pay installments through ECS. As per the banking procedures OP collected the first installment and sent the part loan amount to the Silver Star Motors Mart Pvt. Ltd. Complainant to the reasons best known to him approached the OP to close the account after one month from the date of sanction. In the mean time the amount was already released. Then complainant came forward for settlement with regard to said first settlement. If the complainant failed to purchase the said vehicle from Silver Star Motors Mart Pvt Ltd., for that in our view he can’t blame the OP. After availing the loan after lapse of one month he can’t seek for the cancellation of the same. OP deals with the financial matters naturally bound to collect the interest etc. On hearing the complainant it closed the account after adjusting the first installment towards the closure of the loan. The grievance if any complainant has to redressed against Silver Star Motors Mart Pvt Ltd. Unfortunately no such steps are taken against the Silver Star Motors who are the beneficiaries.<br /> <br /> 7. In view of the contents of the replay to the legal notice referred to above, it appears the present complaint is devoid of merits. OP has choosen wrong party to redress his grievance. The allegations made in the complainant did not spell out the case of hiring of services and suffering from deficiency. Rather it discloses a case relating to settlement of account and for the balance in due on the basis of account. As such we find complainant did not fall with in the ambit section.2 (1) (c) & (e) of the C.P Act. If the complainant is so advised he can file a regular civil suit and redress his grievance for the recovery of the amount. <br /> <br /> 8. Merely because OP has not appeared that does not mean whatever the complainant has stated is a gospel truth. His own records speaks to otherwise of the facts. Under such circumstances when complainant has not approached the Forum with clean hands, he is not entitled for the relief claimed. There is no proof of deficiency in service. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following: <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaint is dismissed. In view of the nature of dispute no order as to costs.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 25th day of November 2008.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> Vln* <br />