BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 27th day of February, 2009

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER

SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER

C.C No.169/2008

Between

Complainant : Rajesh Raju S/o Raju,

Pulickampurathu House,

Alpara P.O, Alpara Kara,

Kanjikuzhy Village,

Idukki District.

(By Adv: V.C.Sebastian)

And

Opposite Parties : 1. S.M.L Finance Limited, Kattappana P.O,

Vellayamkudy,

Idukki District. 2. S.M.L Finance Limited,

Edappilly,

Ernakulam.

(Both by Adv: Sibi Thomas)

O R D E R

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)

The complainant purchased an Ape autorikshaw from the Ist opposite party on 6.02.2006 and registered as KL-6C-7802 by availing loan from the opposite party. There was a finance of Rs.80,000/- for the said autorikshaw and the repayment of the loan was in 36 installments of Rs.3,337/- each. The complainant paid 22 installments and the loan became due after that. On 27.05.2008, Rs.22,000/- was given to the 2^nd opposite party for clearing the dues. Even though the opposite party received the amount, they have recorded only 4 installments in the pass book. The balance Rs.8,652/- was received by the opposite party illegally. After that the complainant requested the opposite party to get the RC Book of the autorikshaw for paying the insurance of the vehicle and for testing the vehicle, but the opposite party denied the same. So the insurance of the vehicle was became due and the complainant was not able to conduct periodical test of the vehicle by the Vehicle Department. So the complainant was not able to ply the vehicle after 17.09.2008 and a loss of Rs.250/- each per day was incurred to the complainant. The complainant is ready to repay the balance amount. But the opposite party demanded Rs.32,000/- for closing the dues. The complainant is entitled to pay only 23,950/- and the opposite party is asked for a huge amount from the complainant. So the complaint is filed for getting the RC book of the vehicle for testing the vehicle and also for deficiency in service of the opposite parties.

2. In the written version filed by the Ist opposite party, also on behalf of the 2^nd opposite party, it is admitted that the complainant availed a loan from the opposite party as per the hire purchase scheme and repayment was in 36 installments of Rs.3,337/-each. After October 2008 the loan became due for 6 installments. So the complainant paid Rs.22,000/- on 27.05.2008 and it is reported in the loan repayment schedule. 5 installments of Rs.3,337/- each were repaid by the complainant and it is recorded in the repayment book. If the loan repayment becomes due, the complainant is entitled to pay fine of the due installments. When the repayment of the loan becomes due, the opposite party cannot issue the RC Book to the complainant. In such cases the opposite party availes the services of the RTO consultant for payment of road tax, insurance etc. with the expense of the complainant. The complainant made heavy loss to the opposite party because of the non-payment of the loan. So the complaint is filed only for avoiding the repayment of the loan and no deficiency is seen from the part of the opposite parties.

3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?

4. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P4(series) marked on the side of the complainant and the oral testimony of DW1 and Exts.R1 to R3 marked on the side of the opposite parties.

5. The POINT :- Complainant availed finance from the opposite parties finance company as per the hypothecation agreement, agreed to pay in 36 equal monthly installments of Rs.3,337/-. The complainant paid the entire amount, but the opposite party is not ready to give back the RC Book and the security cheque leaves to the complainant. Complainant's brother was examined as PW1. Complainant availed loan for purchase of an autorikshaw for the livelihood of his family. As per PW1, the loan amount was Rs.80,000/-, one installment was paid as advance. In the balance 35 installments, 22 installments were paid promptly. Ext.P1 is the copy of the loan pass book. Ext.P4(series) is the bill issued by the opposite party. Then the complainant paid Rs.22,000/- to the opposite party. But the opposite party entered only 4 installments. Ext.P3 is the receipt for Rs.22,000/-. The opposite party did not provide the RC book of the vehicle for payment of road tax. Thus the petition was filed. There was a direction of the Forum to clear the entire dues and collect the RC Book. As per the direction, the complainant paid Rs.23,360/-. So there is no amount due to the opposite party. The manager of the Ist opposite party was examined as DW1. Ist opposite party deposed that the loan amount was Rs.86,000/-. Exts.R1 to R3 are the repayment schedule, loan application and the instructions to the loanee.

Hence the petition allowed. The opposite party is directed to return the RC Book, cheque leaves and all other documents produced before the opposite party's office at the time of availing the vehicle loan. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- for the cost of this petition within one month of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry interest at 12% per annum from the date of default.

.

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 27th day of February, 2009

                      Sd/-

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)

                    Sd/-

SMT.SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER)

                    Sd/-

SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of Complainant :

PW1 -

On the side of Opposite Parties :

DW1 -

Exhibits:

On the side of Complainant:

Ext.P1 - True copy of loan pass book

Ext.P2 -

Ext.P3 - Receipt for Rs.22,000/-

Ext.P4(series) - True copy of Bill issued by the opposite party

On the side of Opposite Parties :

Ext.R1 - Photocopy of Repayment Schedule

Ext.R2 - Loan Application

Ext.R3 - Instructions to the loanee