Kerala

Idukki

CC/138/2021

Abraham Thomas - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sriram Transport finance CmpanyLtd - Opp.Party(s)

17 Mar 2023

ORDER

DATE OF FILING : 30/09/2021

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, IDUKKI

Dated this the 17^th day of March 2023

Present :

              SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR                                               PRESIDENT

              SMT.ASAMOL P.                                                          MEMBER

              SRI.AMPADY K.S.                                                        MEMBER

CC NO.138/2021

Between

Complainant                                    : Abraham Thomas, S/o Raju,              

                                                           Mavilapuryaidam House,

                                                           Murukkady Kara, Murukkady P.O.,

                                                           Kumily Village,

                                                           Peermedu Taluk, Pin – 685 535.

                                                          (By Adv.P.S.Biju)

                                                           And

Opposite Party                  :   The Manager,

                                               M/s Sriram Transport Finance Company Ltd.,

                                               Mookambika Complex, 3^rd Floor, No.4,

                                               Lady Desika Road, Mylapore,

                                              Chennai – 600 004. 

                                                             

O R D E R

SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER

 

Complainant filed this complaint under S.35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.  Brief facts of this complaint are discussed hereunder:-

 

1 . Complainant is a registered owner of a commercial vehicle Mahindra Motor Cab bearing Reg.No.KL-06-E-6780 and he is running this vehicle by himself for earning his livelihood.  Complainant availed loan facility from opposite party on 01/12/2017 for an amount of Rs.2,90,000/- to the said vehicle and agreed to repay the amount in 36 monthly instalment of Rs.15,271/- each starting from 28/02/2017.  Towards the said instalment,

(Cont.....2)

 

-2-

including principal amount and agreed rate of interest, as security for repayment, opposite party obtained signatures of complainant and his guarantor on various papers including printed, stamped, blank and also collected blank cheque leaves of complainant issued from his account and his guarantor.  The instalment period is 28/02/2017 to 28/02/2020.  As per the direction from opposite party, complainant paid various amounts in various places to the collection agents of the Manager of Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd.,.  Complainant had repaid an amount of Rs.2,09,200/- till the date of 05/05/2018.  Then on 28/02/2018, complainant availed another loan of Rs.3,00,000/- for the same vehicle.  Opposite party has deducted a sum of Rs.1,72,009/- from the said loan towards the previous loan.  The tenure of the second loan was from 05/03/2018 to 05/03/2021 and 36 instalments Rs.11,457/- for each month.  Complainant had repaid an amount of Rs.2,46,717/- till the date of 22/02/2020.  In total, complainant had already repaid sum of Rs.6,36,285/- towards both loans from opposite party.  After that due to the Covid -19 pandemic and the lack of work, vehicle of the complainant was kept idle for several months.  Then on 10/09/2021, complainant approached opposite party to settle the loan account for the purpose of sale of the vehicle.  At that time, opposite party demanded from complainant an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- towards the loan.  Opposite party refused to give any written demand or notice even after the demand of complainant.  Opposite party told complainant that, if he refused to pay the amount as per the demand, they will forcefully take possession of the vehicle.

2 . Opposite party has no right to collect any amount more than the agreed amount as default and penal interest any other charges in different heads.  The complainant is always ready to remit the balance amount and has the right to get back the proportionate deduction in the interest portion.  Opposite party has no right to collect any amount as overdue charges and pre closure which is quite illegal and against the provisions of law and which is

(Cont.....3)

-3-

clear question of unfair trade practice.  Now it is reliably learned that opposite party is making preparations to take forceful possession of the vehicle using gundas.  Opposite party openly declared that they will succeed in their illegal attempt at any cost.   The opposite party  has no right to take forceful possession of the vehicle and claim such an exorbitant amount as default charge from complainant.  Complainant is a poor laymen and he cannot resist illegal attempt of the opposite party without the intervention of this Hon’ble Forum.

3 . Complainant is a consumer of the opposite party and above mentioned acts of the opposite party is clear deficiency of service by opposite party and is an unfair trade practice.

Hence, he has prayed for the following reliefs.

1 . Restrain opposite party from taking forcefully possession of the vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-06-E-6780.

2 . Direct opposite party to settle the account of the complainant.

3 . Allow to recover Rs.5,000/- towards compensation and Rs.2,500/- towards cost of the petition from opposite party.

Upon notice served from this Commission, opposite party entered appearance through Adv.Gem Korason.  However, no written version was filed.  Thereafter, this case was posted for complainant’s evidence.  But, complainant was absent and also not represented.  Opposite party was represented by his counsel and it was submitted that complainant has paid loan amount and there are no dues in his loan account.  Hence evidence closed and it was taken for orders.  Now the points which arise for consideration are:-

 

(Cont.....4)

-4-

1.    Whether  there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?
2. If so, what reliefs are entitled to?

Points are considered together.

We have gone through the complaint and documents which was produced along with complaint.  It is the allegation that opposite party has demanded more amount than the agreed amount as default charges and penal interest.  No evidence was adduced by complainant to prove his case.  Complainant is neither present before this Commission nor has adduced any evidence to prove his contentions at any time.  Opposite party has submitted that loan amount was paid by complainant and now there are no dues in the loan account.  Deficiency in service on the part of opposite party is not proved.  Hence, complaint is dismissed without cost.

Extra copies to be taken back by parties without delay.

 Pronounced by this Commission on this the 17^th day of March, 2023.

                                                                                         Sd/-                                                                                 

                                                                                SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER                                                                                                             

                                                                                                   Sd/-

                                                                        SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR, PRESIDENT                                                                                                 

                                                                                                   Sd/-                                                                              

                                                                              SRI.AMPADY K.S., MEMBER

   

 

APPENDIX

Nil

 

                                                                                          Forwarded by Order  

 

 

                                                                                      ASSISTANT REGISTRAR