KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
APPEAL NO.540/10
JUDGMENT DATED 21.1.2011
PRESENT
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT
SRI.S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR -- MEMBER
M/s BRD Securities Limited,
Bethany Complex, Trichur Road, -- APPELLANT
Kunnamkulam Pin 680 503 reptd. by
Its Legal Manager and authorized signatory
Mrs.Seema Rafeeque.
(By Adv.A.K.Chinnan)
Vs.
1. Sasimon K.P
S/o Bahskaran,
Kundupallothodu House,
P.O.Pathaikkara -- RESPONDENTS
Perinthalmanna Pin 679 322.
2. Sub Regional Transport Officer,
Sub Regional Transport Office,
Perinthalmanna.
(R1 By Adv.G.S.Kalkura)
JUDGMENT
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT
The appellants/Financiers are the first opposite party in CC.283/09 in the file of CDRF, Malappuram. The appellants are under orders to issue a no objection certificate regarding hypothecation with respect to the vehicle involved.
2. The matter relates to the dispute regarding the repayment of the loan amounts advanced by the appellant. According to the complainants the entire amounts were paid, but the opposite party is refusing to issue no objection certificate to delete the hypothecation endorsement in the RC.
3. According to the opposite parties a sum of Rs.67,752/- is still due from the complaint. It was also contended that the arbitration proceedings having been initiated the Forum has no jurisdiction.
4. The evidence adduced consisted of Exts.A1 to A4 and B1.
5. The appellant has sought for admitting a number of documents that included the statement of accounts with respect to the particular loan transaction.
6. The Forum has noted that the number of arbitration proceedings is left blank in the version. The Forum has relied on Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act, to invoke jurisdiction. We find that Ext.A4 is the notice issued by the arbitrator dated 28.12.09. The complaint in the instant case is filed on 16.11.09. It is also contended by the counsel for the appellant that the appellant had filed arbitration OP before the District Court and arbitration proceedings were initiated prior to the present complaint. We find that the above documents were not produced before the Forum. It is seen from the order that the fact of filing arbitration OP in the District Court is also not mentioned in the version. Further, the appellant has not insisted the Forum for passing an order with respect to the contention regarding maintainability. In the circumstances, we find that the contention with the complaint is not maintainable before the Forum has to be rejected.
7. All the same, we find that in the absence of documents with respect to repayment by the complainant at the instance of the opposite parties it would be appropriate to remit the matter back to the Forum for a fresh consideration after taking into account, the documents produced by the appellant. Hence, the order of the Forum is set aside on condition that the appellant/opposite party pay a sum of Rs.7500/- to the complainant towards costs or deposit the same before the Forum which can be withdrawn by the complainant. On deposit of costs, the Forum will permit both sides to adduce further evidence and the matter will be disposed of on merits. The Forum will dispose of the matter at the earliest at any rate within 6 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The case will stand posted before the Forum on 28.2.2011.
The office will forward the copy of this order to the Forum urgently.
JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT
S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR -- MEMBER
