KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL NO.568/10

JUDGMENT DATED 8.4.2011

PRESENT

JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU                --  PRESIDENT

SHRI.S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR                    --  MEMBER

1.      Shriram City Union Finance                                                  

39/3500, Manikkath Cross Road,

Ravipuram, Cochin – 16.

2.      The Branch Manager,                               --  APPELLANTS

          Shriram City Union Finance Ltd,

          Nullipady, Kasaragod.

             (By Adv.V.S.SunilKumar)

                   Vs.

Shaharuddin

N.A.House,

Kudlu.P.O. Eriyal,                                               --  RESPONDENT

Kasaragod Taluk & District.

                                                JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT

          The appellants are the opposite parties in CC.273/09 in the file of CDRF, Kasaragod.  The appellants are under orders to return the motor cycle seized from the complainant together with vehicular   documents and a HP Termination Letter and cost of Rs.2,500/-  and in case the RC is not returned to pay a further sum of Rs.1,000/- .  The complainant is also under direction  to pay a sum of Rs.14,000/- towards the amount due to the appellants.

          It is the case of the complainant that he had availed a loan of Rs.36,500/- from the opposite parties undertaking to repay the same at monthly equated installments of Rs.1,422/-  in 36 installments and     the complainant has altogether paid a sum of Rs.43,468/-.  It is stated that the complainant was in judicial custody during the 26.9.09 to 22.10.09.  It is alleged that the opposite parties without notice seized the vehicle, and  the opposite parties are demanding Rs.36,500/-  which is exorbitant.  The opposite parties have refused to give him a copy of the statement of accounts.  It is also alleged that the original RC of the vehicle is with the opposite parties.

          The opposite parties/appellants have contended that the complainant was not regular in the repayments.  The amounts are remitted belatedly.  The allegation of forcible seizure denied.  It  is contended that the complainant has to remit a further sum of Rs.27,911/- as on 6.3.10.  Although the complainant was permitted to remit the amounts he did not do so.

          The evidence adduced consisted of proof affidavits filed by the respective sides and Exts.A1 to A5 and B1 to B3.

          The Forum has noted that the  total amount to be repaid is Rs.50,112.  The amount already repaid is Rs.43,461/-.  The balance would work out to Rs.6,644/-.  Of-course, the above calculation is as per the terms of Ext.B2 loan cum hypothecation agreement   According to the opposite parties, the installments were not  remitted in time.  All the same, the Forum has noted that the interest charged is at flat rate for 36 months without any deduction for monthly payments.  The Forum has also found fault with the method of calculation as an evident from Ext. B1 statement of accounts.  The opposite parties have not adjusted the amounts received towards the previous dues and penal interest has been charged from the date of default  of the previous installments   although, subsequently certain installments were remitted.  In this regard, we agree with the reasoning of the Forum.  The method adopted by the opposite parties/appellants is the one devised to obtain the maximum profit.  The above said method cannot be said  to be just.  It was taking into account the entire circumstances that the Forum has ordered a sum of Rs.14,000/- to be paid in addition.   We find the above order  of the Forum cannot be said to be unjust.  It has to be noted that the opposite parties has forcibly seized the vehicle  which  is illegal.

          All the same, we find that the case of the opposite parties that they are not in possession of the RC book   has not been properly contradicted.  The complainant has not produced anything to show that he has handed over the RC book to the opposite party at the time of availing the finance.

          In the circumstances, the direction to return the RC book which according to the appellants is not in their possession and   the amount ordered to be paid in case the RC book is not  returned is set aside.  The direction of the  Forum   to pay cost of Rs.1000/- is also set aside.

          In the result, the order of the Forum is modified as follows:

          The complainant will pay a sum of Rs.14,000/- to the opposite parties within 2 months from the date of receipt of this order or remit the same before the Forum under intimation to the opposite parties.  On payment or deposit of the same, the opposite parties shall forthwith return the vehicle to the complainant.   In case the amount is not paid within 2 months as specified above  the opposite parties will be entitled for interest at the rate of 12% on Rs.14,000/- from 8.4.11 the date of this order.  The opposite parties can also move the Forum in case the amount is not paid for permission to sell the vehicle and the Forum shall permit the opposite parties to sell the vehicle and realize Rs.14,000/- and interest and the balance if any shall be given to the complainant.

          The appeal is allowed in part as above. 

          The office will forward the LCR along with the copy of this order to the Forum.

JUSTICE  K.R.UDAYABHANU --  PRESIDENT

 S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR --  MEMBER