Kerala

Kasaragod

CC/08/4

Kundalmoola Soofikunhi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sreeram City Union Finance Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

20 Jun 2008

ORDER


.
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KASARAGOD
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/4

Kundalmoola Soofikunhi
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Sreeram City Union Finance Ltd
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. K.T.Sidhiq 2. P.P.Shymaladevi 3. P.Ramadevi

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
1. Kundalmoola Soofikunhi

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. Sreeram City Union Finance Ltd

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

D.o.F: 23/1/08 D.O.O:20/6/08 IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KASARAGOD CC.No.4/08 Dated this, the 20th day of June 2008 PRESENT: SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER SMT.P.P.SHYMALADEVI: MEMBER Kundalmoola Soofikunhi, S/o Muhammed, : Complainant Kallakkatta Po,kasaragod. Sriram City Union Finance Ltd, : Opposite party. New Busstand , Kasaragod. ORDER SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ: PRESIDENT The case of the complainant is that he availed finance facility from opposite party to purchase a vehicle with a stipulation to pay the amount in 24 monthly instalments. He had repaid entire instalments in time and the last instalment he paid directly in the office of opposite party. But the opposite party is not giving back the R.C.book and other documents. Hence the complaint claiming Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the loss and mental agony. 2. Opposite party filed version and contended that the complainant committed default of payment of one instalment for the month of July 2004. As per the stipulation, the complainant should have paid Rs.1882/- each in every month for 24 months commencing from 7/3/04 out of which one paid directly in office and the balance were 23 instalments to which he issued 23 post dated cheques. Since the cheque for dtd.7/7/04 is returned, the said amount is paid by the complainant only on 25/9/06 with cheque bouncing charge Rs.250/-. But he has not paid the overdue charges for the instalment for the month 7/04. Hence the R.C.book and other documents were not returned. 3. Complainant examined as PW1, Exts.A1 to A4 marked. Exts.B1 to B4 produced by opposite party. Ext.B2 is the R.C. book pertaining to the vehicle KL-14/D 7864. Ext.B3 is the no objection Letter and Ext.B4 is the H.P.Termination letter. It is pertinent to mention that Exts.B2 to B4 were produced at the instance of the direction of the Forum. 4. Ext.A1 is dtd.7/7/07 sent by opposite party to the complainant asking him to pay 2 EMI’s of Rs.1882/- each. But during hearing , opposite party could not explain how 2 EMI’s(equated monthly instalments) became due. According to him a sum of Rs.1200/- is due towards overdue charges. But how opposite party arrived at this figure is also not explained. 5. As per the law of appropriation of interest the payment of monthly instalment subsequent to the defaulted monthly instalment should have been first adjusted to the over due interest and the balance to the principal amount. Hence calculation of interest for the defaulted EMI from 7/04 to till date of payment is against the provisions of law of appropriation of interest and if any interest due it should have been adjusted from the next month’s instalment. If that be so, there would have been a very negligible interest and this amount could have been collected, when the complainant made the last instalment directly in the office of opposite party with cheque bouncing charge of Rs.250/-. 6. So it can be seen that the claim of the opposite party that there were overdue charges is not tenable and the complainant was deprived his documents unnecessarily. The act of opposite party of with holding R.C.book ,duplicate key of the vehicle and other documents amounts to deficiency in service. Hence, we allow the complaint and the opposite party directed to pay a compensation of Rs.3000/- to the complainant with a cost of Rs.2000/- within 2 months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Complainant can take back the R.C. book pertaining to his vehicle with No objection letter and Hire purchase Termination Letter on application after the statutory time for appeal is over. Sd/ Sd/ Sd/ MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT Exts: A1-dt.7/7/07-Confirmation leter issued byPW1 to OP A2-Statements of accounts A3-copy of Receipt voucher A4-Copy of cheque B1- premium statement B2- R.C.book B3-No objection letter B4-H.P.Termination letter PW1-Soofikunhi- complainant. Sd/ Sd/ Sd/ MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER eva/ /Forwarded by Order/ Senior Superintendent




......................K.T.Sidhiq
......................P.P.Shymaladevi
......................P.Ramadevi