Kerala

Palakkad

CC/189/2011

Sathyadas - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager - Opp.Party(s)

20 Apr 2012

ORDER

 
CC NO. 189 Of 2011
 
1. Sathyadas
S/o Raman, Sheejalayam, Pulimparambu, Nemmara, chittur Taluk
Palakkad
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Branch Manager
TATA Motors Finance Pvt. Ltd., C/o Vijay Motors, Chunnambuthara
Palakkad
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONARABLE MRS. Seena.H PRESIDENT
 HONARABLE MRS. Bhanumathi.A.K Member
 HONARABLE MRS. Preetha.G.Nair Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PALAKKAD, KERALA


 

Dated this the 20th day of April, 2012.

Present: Smt. Seena. H, President

: Smt. Preetha. G. Nair, Member

: Smt. Bhanumathi. A.K, Member Date of filing: 29/11/2011


 

CC / 189/2011

Sathyadas,

S/o.Raman,

Sheejalayam,Pulimparambu,

Nemmara, Chittur Taluk,

Palakkad District. - Complainant

(By Adv.Sureshkumar.K)

Vs

The Branch Manager,

TATA Motors Finance Pvt.Ltd,

Palakkad, C/O.Vijay Motors, - Opposite party

Chunnambuthara, Palakkad

(By Adv.R.Baluraj)

O R D E R


 

BY SMT. SEENA.H, PRESIDENT


 

Complaint in brief:


 

The case of the complainant is that he approached the opposite party for availing loan for purchasing a Tata Nano Car. Contrary to the period of 5 years as stipulated in the advertisement, opposite party reduced the loan repayment period to 3 years. Complainant decided not to avail loan. Opposite party returned all the documents along with the cancelled cheques produced by the complainant. According to the complainant, the act of the opposite party in cancellation of the cheques is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service for which complainant claim an amount of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) as compensation to the complainant.

 

Opposite party on the other hand has contented that the complainant is not a consumer as he has not availed any loan from the opposite party. Further opposite party has admitted the entire facts stated in the complaint. According to opposite party they have discretion to decide the period of loan repayment verifying the documents produced by the complainant. Opposite party has returned the cheque produced by the complainant

after cancellation so as to avoid any misuse and any future allegation against the opposite party. According to them there is no unfair trade practice or deficiency in service on their part.

The evidence adduced by the parties consists of their respective chief affidavits & Ext.A1 to A7.

Issues for considerations are:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?

2. If so, what is the reliefs and cost complainant is entitled to?

Issue No.1 &2


 

Other than the contention that complainant is not a consumer, the entire facts of the complaint is seen admitted by the opposite party. We also admit the fact that with regard to the terms and conditions of loan and repayment period, bank has the discretion to decide. We do not understand what is the actual loss suffered by the complainant by the act of cancellation of the cheques by the opposite party. It is seen that cheque which is marked as Ext.A1 series is issued in the name of opposite party. We also agree with the say of the opposite party that return of uncancelled cheques may lead to misuse. The act of opposite party cannot be treated as unfair trade practice or deficiency in service. Complainant has not adduced any evidence to prove any loss suffered by him. It is seen that the complainant miserable failed to prove his case.

Hence Complaint dismissed.

Pronounced in the open court on this the 20th day of April, 2012

Sd/-

Smt. Seena. H

President

Sd/-

Smt. Preetha.G.Nair

Member

Sd/-

Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K

Member


 

A P P E N D I X


 

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant


 

Ext. A1– 20 cheque leaves of IndusInd Bank Ltd, Chandranagar, Palakkad for Rs.3660/- bearing Nos. 658826 to 658845.

Ext. A2 – Account statement of the complainant issued from SBT, Nemmara Branch (Photocopy)

Ext. A3 – Attested copy of Electoral ID Card No.KL/07/051/237224 dt.08/09/1998.

Ext.A4– Attested copy of Ration Card No.1947052687 dt.24/12/2008.

Ext.A5– Letter dt.15/10/2011 issued to the Branch Manager, TATA Motors Finance Ltd, Thrissur(Original) .

Ext.A6 – Certificate issued by the Manager, Federal Bank Ltd, Nemmara to Branch Manager, TATA Motors Finance Ltd, Thrissur with regard to the status of O.D account of the complainant(original)

Ext.A7– Advertisement given by the opposite party in the Malayalam daily “Desabhimani” dated 21.09.2011.

 

Exhibits marked on the side of opposite party


 

Nil.

Witness examined on the side of complainant

Nil.


 

Witness examined on the side of opposite party

Nil

 
 
[HONARABLE MRS. Seena.H]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONARABLE MRS. Bhanumathi.A.K]
Member
 
[HONARABLE MRS. Preetha.G.Nair]
Member

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.