KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUANANTHAPURAM APPEAL NO.39/2010 JUDGMENT DATED15.5.2010 PRESENT SMT.VALSALA SARANGADHARAN -- MEMBER SRI.M.V.VISWANATHAN -- JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. Manappuram Financial Services, Reptd. by its Chairman, Manappuram House, V/104, Valapad – 680 567, Thrissur. 2. Manappuram Financial Services, -- APPELLANTS Reptd. by its Branch Manager, Capri Building, Pazhavangadi, East Fort, Thiruvananthapuram. (N.Padmini) Vs. Santhosh Kumar M.S T.C.23/641, Valiyasala -- RESPONDENT Chalai P.O, Thiruvananthapuram. JUDGMENT SRI.M.V.VISWANATHAN,JUDIIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated 15.11.08 passed by CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram in CC.No.134/07. The complaint in CC.134/07 was filed by the respondent herein against the appellants/opposite parties alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in not giving the original of the RC book and Insurance paper with respect to the vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-01-X 329. The opposite parties were served with notice in the said complaint, but they remained ex-parte. Based on the evidence adduced by the complainant as PW1 and the documentary evidence P1 to P5, the Forum below passed the impugned order directing the opposite parties to return the original RC book and Insurance papers of the vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-01-X 329. The opposite parties are also directed to give the loan proposal and other details of the loan to the complainant with a further direction to pay compensation of Rs.2000/- and cost of Rs.1500/-. Aggrieved by the said order, the present appeal is filed by the opposite parties therein. 2. The appeal was filed with a petition to condone the delay in preferring the appeal. The aforesaid IA.92/2010 was allowed by this Commission vide order dated 12.4.10, and the appeal was posted for hearing on the question of admission. But, when the appeal was taken up for admission hearing, there was no representation for the appellants. The respondent/complainant appeared in person. He submitted his case in support of the impugned order passed by the Forum below. 3. This Commission has also called for the Lower Court Records and the same is also available for scrutiny. 4. There is no dispute that the respondent/complainant availed a loan from the opposite parties for purchase of the second hand Santro car bearing Reg.No.KL-01-X 329. Admittedly, the respondent/complainant has to repay the loan amount availed from the opposite parties. There is no quarrel about the fact that amount is due to the appellants/opposite parties from the complainant. The dispute is regarding the quantum of the loan amount and interest due from the respondent/complainant to the appellants/opposite parties. It is submitted by the respondent/complainant who appeared in person that the appellants have moved the District Court, Trichur to get the loan amount and other outstanding dues. It is also submitted that an arbitration award has been passed by the arbitrator and the appellants approached the District Court, Trichur to get the arbitration award executed. It is further submitted that arbitration proceedings were initiated against the guarantor of the respondent/complainant. 5. The Forum below has only directed the appellants/opposite parties to return the original RC book and Insurance papers of the said vehicle for the purpose of convenient use of the vehicle. It is to be noted that the respondent/complainant is the present registered owner of the said vehicle and that he is in possession of the same. So, the registration certificate and Insurance papers are required for plying the vehicle on road. The Forum below is justified in directing the appellants/opposite parties to return the RC book and Insurance papers and also to give the details of the loan transaction to the respondent/complainant. 6. The Forum below has further directed the opposite parties to pay compensation of Rs.2000/- with cost of Rs.1500/-. The materials on record would show that the respondent/complainant committed default in repaying the loan amount. It is only because of the aforesaid default the opposite parties were reluctant in returning the RC book and Insurance papers. There was some sort of fault or lapse on the part of the respondent/complainant. In such an event, the direction to pay compensation of Rs.2000/- is unwarranted. So, the direction to pay compensation of Rs.2000/- is deleted. But, the direction to pay cost of Rs.1500/- is treated as just reasonable and Hence the same is confirmed. 7. The appellants were absent before the Forum below. No justifiable reasons is stated for the absence of the opposite parties before the forum below. Thus, the Forum below had only the option to declare the opposite parties ex-parte and to proceed with the complaint in CC.134/07. So, the impugned ex-parte order passed by the Forum below is to be confirmed with the modification as indicated above. The appellants are also absent in this Appeal proceedings. Hence the present appeal is disposed of as indicated above. In the result, the appeal is disposed of. The impugned order dated 15.11.08 passed by CDRF; Thiruvananthapuram in CC.134/07 is modified. Thereby, the appellants/opposite parties are directed to return the original RC book and Insurance papers of the vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-01-X 329 to the respondent/complainant. The order passed by the forum below directing payment of compensation of Rs.2000/- is deleted. The appellants/opposite parties have to pay the cost of Rs.1500/- to the complainant as ordered by the forum below. As far as the present appeal is concerned, the parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. M.V.VISWANATHAN -- JUDICIAL MEMBER VALSALA SARANGADHARAN -- MEMBER s/L | 
