Date of filing : 26-05-2011
Date of order : 02-02-2012
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.121/2011
Dated this, the 2nd day of February 2012
PRESENT
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER
SMT. K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
1. Chandrashekaran, } Complainant
S/o.M.N.Narayanan,
R/at Painikara, Kallar Village,
Hosdurg Taluk & Kasaragod.Dt.
2. M.Jaleel, S/o. Hameed,
Poodamkall, Kallar Village,
Hosdurg Taluk
(Adv. Raveednran.B, Kasaragod)
Shriram Transport Finance Co.Ltd, } Opposite parties
Kannariyath Buildings,
Manikoth.Po.Kottacheri North,
Kanhangad.Po. Rep. by Power of Attorney
Holder Sri. Subbayya.B.
(Adv. Ramakrishna.P. Kasaragod)
O R D E R
SRI.K.T. SIDHIQ, PRESIDENT
Complainant availed a loan for purchasing a vehicle KL-50/3718 Trax Cargo. He executed 2 agreements. First one was in 2006 and the second was in 2009 for an amount `3,50,000/-. The amount repayable was `10,325/- in each month. Complainant paid `91,000/- as advance amount for purchasing the vehicle. Complainant repaid more than 2 lakhs towards the loan and he is having receipts for `161420/-. Subsequently he sold the vehicle to one Jaleel and Jaleel paid 5 instalments to the company and thereafter he laid up due to illness and not able to pay instalments. Then opposite party seized the vehicle from Jaleel in September 2010 and without legally informing the complainant they sold the vehicle. Now again opposite party is claiming `3,43,555/- from the complainant. Complainant later came to know that the vehicle was sold only for `76,000/- though it had a market value of `4,00,000/-. Thereby complainant suffered mental agony and sufferings. Therefore the complainant seeking an order exonerating him payment of any further amount to opposite party.
2. According to opposite party the complainant has borrowed `3,50,000/- for the purchase of Force Trax Cargo bearing Reg.No.KL 60-3718. The loan was agreed to be repaid in 48 monthly instalments of 10325/- each commencing from 1-5-2009. The opposite party submitted that the total value of the agreement is `4,95,600/-. The complainant made payment of `1,20,847/- in total. The principal amount due is `2,49,195/-. Total amount `3,43,555/- as on 14-10-2010. Besides the complainant is also liable to pay the subsequent interest. The complainant is liable to pay the aforesaid amount to the opposite party. The opposite party issued registered letter to the complainant to settle the account and also informing the sale of vehicle in his failure to take back the vehicle. But complainant did not turn up to settle the loan dues and take back the vehicle. Therefore after complying all the formalities the vehicle is sold and after that sent notice to complainant intimating the rate. But he did not turn up. Hence the matter was referred to arbitrator. Therefore there is no deficiency on their part.
3. Ist complainant Chandrashekaran filed proof affidavit. Exts A1 to A16 marked on the side of the complainant. Complainant cross-examined by the learned counsel for opposite parties. On the side of opposite party Exts B1 to B12 marked. Both sides heard.
4. PW1 deposed that he executed Ext.B1 agreement is 2009 and he did not remember the total amount paid under each agreement. He deposed that there was default in remitting monthly instalments. He also deposed that he received notice from arbitrator but did not appear before him since he was laid up and he did not take any steps to challenge the award of the arbitrator. He also deposed that he received a notice from opposite party but don’t know the contents of that letter and he handed over the vehicle to second complainant Jaleel and no consideration was fixed for the vehicle and the vehicle was repossessed from Jaleel. He further deposed that on the date of sale 5 instalments of `10325/- were due besides `5000/- he received from opposite party in cash. He further stated that Jaleel has paid 5 instalments. But no receipts were produced to show the above payments. He further stated that he has not taken any steps to assess the value of the vehicle at the time of sale by opposite party and one Saji was driving the vehicle when it was in his custody. Saji was his employee and he also stated that he did not know the conditions of the vehicle at the time of re-possession from Jaleel.
5. Exts.A1 to A14 are the receipts received from the opposite party towards the payment 6 monthly instalments. Ext.A15 is the copy of the agreement executed between 1st and 2nd complainant. Exts A1 to A14 shows that complainant was not prompt in making the monthly payment. Further even as per Ext.B2 at the time of transferring the vehicle 3 instalments were due and there is nothing to show the payments if any made by second complainant Jaleel.
6. Ext.A3 is an endorsement in the form of a notice issued by opposite party to complainant on 7-1-2009. As per that they informed the complainant that the vehicle is repossessed since there is a due of `81,155/- towards arrears.
7. On the other hand opposite party produced Exts B1 to B12 to substantiate their case. Ext.B1 is the copy of loan cum hypothecation agreement. Ext.B7 is a copy of the registered letter issued to Chandran and Mathew, the guarantors of 1st complainant. In the said notice it is stated that the vehicle bearing KL-60/3718 will be sold and the sale proceeds will be appropriated towards the amount due to opposite party. Ext.A2 is the postal acknowledgement of a registered article issued to Chandran, the guarantor of complainant. Ext.B4 is the account statement pertaining to the loan given to the complainant in which the due amount shown as `3,43,555/-. Ext.B5 is the Utharadesam News paper daily dated 7-4-2010 in which an advertisement of sale is published by opposite party. In the advertisement the vehicle number of the complainant is also seen mentioned. Ext. B6 is the postal acknowledgement evidencing the receipt of a postal article received by Mathew the guarantor of 1st complainant. Ext.B8 is the photocopy of the RC of the vehicle of the complainant. Ext.B9 is a letter issued by one M. Rajesh to the opposite party quoting `76,000/- as the price of the vehicle KL 60 3718 (Force Cargo 2006) and taking delivery of the vehicle. Ext.B10 is the copy of valuation certificate issued by one Vasudevan Thekkayil surveyor. In Ext.B10 the value of the vehicle is shown as `75,000/-.
8. From the documents produced by the opposite party it is clear that opposite party had given all opportunities to the complainant for closing the loan and taking delivery of the vehicle. But the complainant was negligent in taking back the vehicle after settling the loan dues.
In the circumstances we cannot see any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Hence the complaint fails and hence it is dismissed.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1. 20-12-2006 photocopy of receipt issued by Speed Automobiles.
A2. Photocopy of RC. KL-60-3718
A3.07-01-2009 Receipt.
A4. 29-06-2009 Temporary Receipt issued by OP
A5. Customer copy
A6.11-2-2008 HP/Lease Acknowledgment Slip.
A7. 30-09-2008 ,,
A8. 18-12-2007 Secure Loans loan receipt.
A9 03-05-2008 Loan receipt
A10.21-08-2007 Secured Loans Loan receipt.
A11. 05-07-2007 Receipt
A12. 24-10-2007 Installment collection own unit cash receipt
A13. 31-3-2008 HP/Lease Acknowledgement slip.
A14. 30-09-2008 Acknowledgment receipt
A15. Photocopy of Agreement
A16. Motor Insurance certificate cum policy schedule GCCV-Public Carriers other than
three wheelers package policy-Zone C.
B1. Photocopy of loan Cum Hypothecation Agreement
B2. Postal acknowledgment card
B3. Photocopy of OP No.596/2010
B4. Account Statement as on 14-10-2010.
B5. Utharadesh daily 7-4-2010
B6. Postal acknowledgement card
B7.8-4-2010 photo copy of Registered letter
B8. Photocopy of RC
B9.3-6-2010 letter sent by Rajesh to OP
B10. 01-06-2010 Photocopy of Motor Valuation Report.
B11. Hirer ledger details as on1-12-2011
B12. Transaction Details of the agreement
PW1. Chandrashekaran
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pj/
