Complaint filed on: 04-03-2020

                                                      Disposed on: 08-03-2022

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, TUMAKURU

CC.No.22/2020  

DATED THIS THE 8^th DAY OF MARCH, 2022

PRESENT

SRI.KUMARA.N, B.Sc. (Agri), MBA, L.L.B, PRESIDENT (I/c)

SMT.NIVEDITA RAVISH, B.A., L.L.B, LADY MEMBER

Complainant: -                

Jafar Sadiq

S/o Sardar Pasha,

28 years, R/at 15^th Cross,

PH colony, Tumkur

(By Sri.Dawood Khan.S.J, Advocate)

V/s

Opposite parties:-                                    

1. Shivakumar,

Manager,

M/s S.Keerthi Auto Finance,

Tumkur branch,

Oil Mill Road,

Four wheel cross road,

Opp. Ex. Counselor Tarunesh house,

Tumakuru

2. Suresh Babu.G

S/o Gopalakrishna

M/s S.Keerthi Auto Finance,

Proprietor/Manager,

Thirumalesha building,

New Mosque Lane,

Op. Old Bus stand,

Hindupur-515201

Andhra Pradesh   

(OP Nos.1 &2-by Sri.K.S.Jagannatha, Advocate)

ORDER

SRI.KUMARA.N, PRESIDENT (I/c)

This complaint was filed by the complainant to direct the Opposite parties (herein after called as OPs) to hand over the seized heavy goods vehicle of complainant, to the complainant by adjusting the balance loan amount of Rs.57,000-00

2. It is the case of complainant that, the complainant was owner of heavy goods vehicle bearing Reg. No.KA-19-AA-6586. The complainant availed a loan of Rs.2,41,000-00 from the OPs. Further the complainant submitted that upto 4-6-2018 the complainant paid Rs.1,84,000-00 to the OPs towards the said vehicle loan amount. In spite of that the OPs seized the said vehicle by giving reasons not paid loan amount as agreed and taken away the said vehicle. Further submitted that the complainant is being an ill-literature, the OPs taken signature on receipts and cheated the complainant. The complainant purchased this vehicle for his livelihood. The complainant repeatedly approached the OPs to release the said vehicle and ready to pay the balance loan amount of Rs.57,000-00 and in spite of repeated requests and visited the OPs office, the OPs not responded, finally on 6-2-2020 issued legal notice, in spite of that the OPs not responded. Hence, this complaint.

3. After registering the complaint, the OPs appeared through their counsel, but not filed affidavit, version and written arguments. In spite of granting sufficient time, the OPs were long absent for further proceedings.

          4. The complainant counsel filed affidavit evidence and produced 21 documents which were marked as Exs.P1 to P21.

          5. In spite of granting sufficient time, the OPs counsel not advanced the arguments and heard arguments of complainant counsel and posted for orders.

6. On perusal of the averments of complaint and affidavit evidence of complainant, the following points arise for our consideration.

1)      Whether the complainant proves the deficiency in service on the part of OPs?

2)      Is complainant entitled to the reliefs sought for?

7. Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1: In the negative  

Point No.2: In the negative for the below

REASONS

           8. Point No.1 and 2: We have gone through the averments of complaint and affidavit evidence of complainant and other relevant records produced before this Commission. As per Ex/P1 was hire purchase agreement between the complainant and OPs. Exs.P2 to P14 were receipts of loan amount paid by the complainant which were given by the OPs. Ex.15 was the RC of the vehicle issued by the Registering Authority, Transport Department, Tumkur and the said vehicle stood in the name of complainant. Ex.16 was the driving licence of complainant issued by the transport department, Tumkur. Ex.P17 was the Aadhar card of complainant. Ex.P18 was Form KMV 45, Goods Carriage Permit issued by the RTO, Tumkur to the complainant. Ex.P19 was the road tax receipt issued by the RTO, Tumkur. Ex.P20 was the article tracking details issued by the Asst. Post master, Tumkur. Ex.P21 was legal notice dated 6-2-2020 issued by the complainant’s advocate to the OPs.    

          9. On perusal of the Ex.P1 which was agreement executed between the complainant and OPs dated 4-6-2016 wherein the complainant availed loan of Rs.2,41,000-00 to purchase the said vehicle by agreeing to repay in 24 monthly installments on the respective due dates from 4-7-2016 to 4-6-2018 (24 months) total a sum of Rs.2,41,000-00 to the OPs. The complainant paid 13 installments on 3- 7-2017 for Rs.10,000-00/Ex.P2, on 25-9-2017 for Rs.15,000-00/Ex.P3, on 26-2-2016 for Rs.10,000-00/Ex.P4, on 30-11-2017 for Rs.8,000-00/Ex.P5, on 30-11-2016 for Rs.10,000-00/Ex.P6, on 21-4-2017 for Rs.15,000-00/Ex.P7, on 5-4-4018 for Rs.15,000-00/Ex.P8, on 6-7-2018 for Rs.11,000-00/Ex.P9, on 6-8-2016 for Rs.10,000-00/P10, on 7-10-2016 for Rs.10,000-00/Ex.P11, on 8-9-2016 for Rs.10,000-00/Ex.P12, on 17-1-2018 for Rs.10,000-00/Ex.P13, and on 12-7-2018 for Rs.20,000-00/Ex.P14 respectively. We have gone through the above said receipts produced by the complainant, wherein it is crystal clear that, the complainant has not paid the loan amount as per agreement entered between the complainant and OPs and last loan repayment by the complainant on 12-7-2018 and complainant issued legal notice to OP on 6-2-2020 i.e. 19 months of gap wherein, the complainant has not stated in the complaint or affidavit evidence where and when the complainant vehicle seized by the OPs. The complainant has not produced any believable material evidence to prove his case. Thus, we come to conclusion that the complainant has failed to prove deficiency of service on the part of OPs.  Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following;

ORDER

The complaint filed by complainant is dismissed without costs.

Furnish the copy of order to the complainant and opposite parties at free of cost.

          (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, corrected and then pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 8^th day of March, 2022).

LADY MEMBER                                               PRESIDENT (I/c)