IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS’ DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSORE<br /> <br /> PRESENT: 1. Shri.A.T.Munnoli<br /> B.A., L.L.B (Spl.) - President <br /> <br /> 2. Smt.Y.V.Uma Shenoi<br /> M.Sc., B.Ed., - Member<br /> 3. Shri. Shivakumar.J.<br /> B.A., L.L.B., - Member<br /> <br /> CC 280/09 DATED 09.10.2009<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> Complainant Amaravathi.M.M.,<br /> Managing Director,<br /> Sky way International Travels, No.370/4, JLB Road, Mysore.<br /> <br /> (By Sri. D.S.Shivaprakash, Advocate)<br /> <br /> Vs. <br /> Opposite Parties 1. The Senior Manager, <br /> TATA Motors Finance Ltd., No.189/10K, Corner Store, Ramavilasa road, K.R.Mohalla, Mysore.<br /> 2. The Divisional Manager, TATA Motors Finance Ltd., E-Nest Finance Ltd., 3rd Floor, Hafeeza Chambers, No.111/03, K.H.Road, Bangalroe-27.<br /> (By Sri. H.S.Kumar, Advocate)<br /> <br /> Nature of complaint : Deficiency in service<br /> Date of filing of complaint : 05.08.2009<br /> Date of appearance of O.P. : 25.08.2009<br /> Date of order : 09.10.2009<br /> Duration of Proceeding : 1 MONTH 14 DAYS<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. A.T.Munnoli,<br /> President<br /> <br /> 1. The complainant has filed the complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against the opposite parties, claiming a sum of Rs.57,600/- refund of insurance amount, Rs.20,736/- interest and Rs.1,00,000/- damages for mental agony.<br /> <br /> 2. In the complaint, amongst other facts, it is alleged that, complainant purchased two cars No.KA-09-A-5872 and KA-09-A-5873 availing loan from the opposite parties. Towards repayment of the installments, opposite parties had collected 36 post-dated cheques for Rs.13,800/- and Rs.8,850/-, for both the vehicles. Representatives of the opposite party informed the complainant that said amount will not include vehicle insurance. Believing the words in good faith, complainant had put her signature to blank loan papers. After purchasing the vehicles, complainant herself got them registered, paying insurance premium to the Oriental Insurance Company. That was informed to the opposite parties by the letter dated 17.07.2006 along with records. Later, complainant learnt, the opposite party deliberately deducted insurance premium of Rs.34,200/- and Rs.23,400/- for 2 years. Immediately, complainant approached the opposite parties through letter dated 26.09.2007, informing that she had taken insurance policies and the complainant requested to reduce the said amount in the loan amount and revise the repayment schedule. The opposite parties told, the amount will be refunded at the time of closure of the account. Also, opposite parties informed that they have received refund of money from their Insurance Company that is Manipal Insurance Company Ltd., and also cancellation of the policies. Believing the same, the complainant can be kept quite. The opposite parties taking undue advantage of the innocence of the complainant, mis-used the blank loan papers including the vehicle insurance with the loan amount. Also, the opposite parties mis-placed 13 cheques of the complainant. This fact was came to the knowledge of the complainant, when she found the installments were not debited in her bank account. The complainant wrote to the opposite parties to look into the matter. Then, the complainant gave fresh cheques in place of mis-placed cheques. The complainant honestly cleared the in loan promptly. Also, it is alleged, even though, the loan agreement was entered into on 07.07.2006 and 36 post-dated cheques were obtained, the opposite parties manipulated the date of loan agreement as 02.07.2006, so as to show the due date as 2nd of every month. Consequently, every payment made is late and every month opposite parties charged Rs.500/- and Rs.200/- amounting to Rs.25,200/-. Further, the complainant called upon the opposite parties to refund the insurance amount and to release the documents to get the hypothecation cancelled. The opposite parties have not issued NOC and complied the request of the complainant. Hence, it is prayed to allow the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. Both the opposite parties have appeared before the Forum through advocate, but ultimately, no version is filed.<br /> <br /> 4. To prove the facts alleged in the complaint, the complainant has filed her affidavit. For the opposite parties, no affidavit or evidence is placed on record. When the matter was posted for arguments, opposite parties and their advocate were absent. We have heard the advocate for the complainant and perused the records.<br /> <br /> 5. Now the points arises for consideration are as under:-<br /> 1. Whether the complainant has proved any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and that she is entitled to reliefs sought?<br /> 2. What order?<br /> <br /> 6. Our findings are as under:-<br /> Point no.1 : Partly in the Affirmative.<br /> Point no.2 : As per the order.<br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 7. Point no. 1:- Without repeating the facts narrated at the beginning of the order, with reference to the complaint, which has been stated by the complainant in the affidavit, though the opposite parties appeared before the Forum, no version is filed and the opposite parties have not denied or disputed the facts alleged in the complaint. The said facts are corroborated by the documents.<br /> <br /> 8. Main grievance of the complainant is that, she borrowed loan to purchase the vehicles and at that time, there was an understanding that the complainant to get her vehicles insured. Accordingly, paying the premium, the complainant got the vehicles insured with the Oriental Insurance Company, for which copies of the policies are produced. In spite of it, the opposite parties also insured the vehicles with Manipal Insurance Company Ltd for the same period and paid the premium, which was added or included in the loan of the complainant. After coming to know of this fact, the complainant objected and informed to the opposite parties that she has already insured the vehicles. After several correspondences between the parties, ultimately opposite parties got the insurance cancelled with Manipal Insurance Company Ltd. and even, the premium paid was collected by the opposite parties. It is claimed by the complainant that opposite parties had promised to refund or to pay the said amount or the amount was to be adjusted towards loan by re-schedule, but that has not been done. The complainant submits loan has been duly repaid. Considering these facts, the amount that has been collected by the opposite parties from the insurance company or that the amount that the opposite parties added or included in the loan of the complainant, shall have to be repaid. It is specifically claimed by the complainant that including that amount, she has repaid the entire loan. Hence, the opposite parties are bound to pay Rs.57,600/-, the insurance amount added in the loan and collected the same from the complainant.<br /> 9. Further grievance of the complainant is that, despite discharge of entire loan, the opposite parties have not returned the original documents and issued NOC to get the hypothecation cancelled from. At the cost of repetition, the opposite parties though appeared before the Forum have not denied or disputed the said claim of the complainant. Hence, the opposite parties are bound to return the original documents and to give NOC to the complainant enabling her to get the hypothecation cancelled.<br /> <br /> 10. The complainant has claimed Rs.1,00,000/- damages towards mental agony. Considering the facts and the circumstances of this case, we feel it just awarding of Rs.10,000/- in this regard will meet the ends of justice.<br /> <br /> 11. Accordingly, our finding is partly in the affirmative.<br /> <br /> 12. Point No. 2:- Considering the discussion made above and conclusion arrived at, we pass the following order:- <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 1. The Complaint is partly allowed.<br /> 2. The opposite parties jointly and severally are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.57,600/- to the complainant, within a month from the date of the order, failing which, the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 18% p.a. till realization.<br /> 3. Further, opposite parties jointly and severally pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- damages to the complainant towards mental agony, within a month from the date of the order and on failure to pay, it will carry interest at the rate of 12% p.a. till realization.<br /> 4. Further, the opposite party are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,500/- towards cost of the proceeding to the complainant. <br /> 5. Give a copy of this order to each party according to Rules.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, transcript revised by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this the day 9th October 2009)<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (A.T.Munnoli) <br /> President <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Y.V.Uma Shenoi)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Shivakumar.J.)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />