BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

ERNAKULAM.

Date of filing : 02/07/2011

Date of Order : 30/11/2011

Present :-

Shri. A. Rajesh, President.

Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.

Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

C.C. No. 352/2011

Between

And

O R D E R

A. Rajesh, President.

1. The facts of the case leading to this complaint are as follows :

The complainant is the registered owner of the car bearing Registration No. KL-07/AD/8897. The 1^st opposite party sanctioned the complainant a mileage account limit upto Rs. 95,000/-. The 1^st opposite party used to collect monthly charges from the complainant upto 25-07-2009. On 25-07-2009, as demanded by the opposite parties, the complainant paid a sum of Rs. 7,200/- towards full and final settlement of the account. The 2^nd opposite party agreed to issue the N.O.C and Form 35 within 10 days in which they failed for their own reasons. He waited indefinitely for about 2 years but in vain. The complainant is entitled to get the N.O.C and Form 35, so as to remove the hypothecation endorsement in the R.C. Book together with compensation of Rs. 95,000/- and costs of the proceedings. This complaint hence.

2. The version of the 1^st opposite party :

The N.O.C. and other relevant papers were handed over to the complainant on the day of 1^st posting itself. The opposite party had made all the papers ready when they got a notice from this Forum. As per the procedure after clearing the dues, the customer has to submit a request letter to the Bank to release the N.O.C. The complainant has not suffered any mental agony, harassment on account of the acts of the Bank. There is considerable delay in filing this complaint.

3. Despite service of notice from this Forum, the 2^nd opposite party did not appear for his own reasons. The complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts. A1 to A5 were marked on his side. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced by the 1^st opposite party. Argument notes were filed by the parties. Heard the respective counsel.

4. The points that arose for consideration are :-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to get N.O.C. and Form 35 of his vehicle?

2. Whether the opposite parties are liable to pay compensation of Rs. 95,000/- and costs of the proceedings to the complainant?

5. Point No. i. :- Admittedly at the threshold on the first day of appearance on 05-08-2011, the 1^st opposite party handed over the N.O.C. and Form 35 of the vehicle to the complainant. So, there arises no cause for the complaint itself.

6. Point No. ii. :- According to the complainant as per Ext. A5 agreement dated 25-07-2009, the opposite parties agreed to issue the N.O.C. and Form 35 within 10 days from the date of execution. Further, he contended that he had to run from pillar to post to get his grievances redressed. The 1^st opposite party maintains that the complainant failed to make a request to the 1^st opposite party to issue N.O.C. and Form 35 in furtherance of Ext. A5 agreement.

7. We have carefully gone through Ext. A5 agreement between the parties. In Ext. A5 agreement, the opposite parties agreed to issue the N.O.C. and Form 35 within 10 days from the date of execution of the agreement. We are not to appreciate the contention of the 1^st opposite party that the complainant ought to have issued a letter to the opposite party to issue the documents in continuation of Ext. A5 agreement dated 25-07-2009, especially since such a clause is not there in the agreement. However, the 1^st opposite party forthwith issued the necessary documents as and when they received notice from this Forum appreciably so. Though, the N.O.C. and form 35 were to be issued within 10 days as agreed for reasons not before us was not done. However, the complainant did not raise any issue on account of the same, approaching the Forum till now law does not favour the late comer. Nothing is on record nor proved to substantiate the contention that the 1^st opposite party had levied amounts illegally. In the above circumstances, we are of the view that since the primary grievances of the complainant having been met squarely and adequately no order as to compensation and costs are called for.

8. In the result, the proceedings in this complaint stands closed.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30^th day of November 2011.

Sd/- A. Rajesh,President.

Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member.

Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

Forwarded/By Order,

Senior Superintendent.

A P P E N D I X

Complainant's Exhibits :-

Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil

=========