BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL
Present: Sri.K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B President
And
Smt. C.Preethi, M.A.LL.B., Lady Member
Friday the 12th day of December, 2008
C.C.No. 91/08
Between:
K. Raghava Reddy, S/o . K. Ramalinga Reddy,
R/o. Hanmanpally Village, Kosigi Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. … Complainant
Versus
The Collection Manager, ICICI Bank Limited,
U Con Plaza, Park Road, Kurnool. … Opposite party
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.G.Madhu Sudhan Reddy, Advocate, for the complainant, and Sri.P.Madhusudhan Reddy , Advocate, for the opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Sri. K.V.H.Prasad, President)
C.C.No.91/08
1. This case of the complainant is filed U/S 12 of C.P.Act seeking direction on the opposite party to deliver to the complainant Bazaj Platinum Motor Cycle bearing No. AP 22 L 7522 receiving the loan amount in installments , Rs.1 lakh as damages and compensation for mental agony and the cost of the case alleging deficiency of service of the opposite party in causing two legal notices on 15-5-2007 alleging the dishonour of cheques bearing No. 428361 and 428363 dated 10-12-2006 and 10-2-2007 and illegally seizing the above said motor cycle on 26-7-2007 containing a registered sale deed also , inspite of regular payments of installments without paying and causing a free sale notice demanding Rs.,29,524/- for return of the seized vehicle and not even to responding to the legal notice dated 14-8-2007 .
2. In pursuance of the receipt of the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant , the opposite party has caused its appearance through its counsel and contested the case filling written version denying any deficiency in said seizure as the complainant defaulted the installments on account of known payments of post dated cheques which mention is taken in legal notice 15-5-2007 and the said hypothecation agreement executed by the complainant permits seizure in case of default in payment of installments . It further submits that on verification of the statement of account of Kosigi Post office produced by the complainant the said non clearance of cheque was due to delay in transit of collection , informed the complainant by phone and by a written communication dated 14-12-2007 to come and receive the seized vehicle and the complainant refused the said offer demanding Rs. 1 lakh with molafide intention and so there by any proper cause of action to the complainant and the forum being having any jurisdiction to entertain the dispute relating to hypothecation agreement between the parties and seeks dismissal of the case with cost.
3. In substantiation of the contentions while the complainant side has taken reliance on documentary record in Ex.A1 to A9 and the sworn affidavit
of the complainant , the opposite party side has taken reliance on documentary record in Ex.B1 to B5 and the sworn affidavit of the opposite party .
4. Hence the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out any deficiency of the opposite party towards him and there by any liability of the opposite party to the complainants claim.
5. The Ex.A1 and A2 are the letters dated 15-5-2007 addressed to the complainant by the opposite party alleging the cheque Nos. 428361 dated 10-12-2006 for Rs.1300/- and another cheque No. 428363 dated 10-2-2007 for Rs.1300/- issued towards complainants account loan No. LTMBN 0000847 3644 was not honoured by the complainants bank and so requires the complainant for seeing its proceeds immediately requiring the complainant to contract his bank and see the reaching of said proceeds immediately .
6. The EX.A8 ledger extract entries issued by the Sub-Post Master Kosigi of Mahaboobnagar District on 13-08-2007 for the post office SB account No.55020 relating to the complainant envisages the deposit of said cheques 428361 and 428363 on 14-5-2007 and 12-6-2007 for their deduction from SBI account No. 55020 and on 14-5-2007 and 12-6-2007 respectively . It is the admitted case of the both sides that the complainant has issued 24 post dated cheques is of Rs.1300/- towards the monthly installments payable for the loan amount availed for purchase of said motor cycle and hypothecation agreement . When the post dated cheques so issued by the complainant were in possession and custody of the opposite party it is for him to send them periodically for the collection and the complainant will be at fault if those post dated cheques were dishonored for want of sufficient funds in the account on which they were issued . There is any such communication to the opposite party from the Sub post master , Kosigi . For any delayed submission of their encashment from the opposite party side the complainant cannot be blamed or found fault with except in the case of the dishonor for want of sufficient fund the complainants account .But as on the other hand the entries in Ex.A9 – SB account pass book of the complainant shows sufficient amount in balance to meet the cheques show issued in advance to the opposite party . While such is so with the above material the entries of Ex.B3 account statement of the complainant loan account No. LTMB 00008473644 with the opposite party bank for the period 10-12-2006 to 10-11-2008 envisages the clearance of the cheque No. 428361 on 12-12-2006 and the clearance of cheque No. 428363 dated 10-2-2006 itself and so the issual of notice in Ex.A1 and A2 on 15-5-2007 as if their amount proceeds not reached its account appear to be a hasty Act of the opposite party without verifying its relevant records .
7. The pre-sale notice dated 28-7-2007 in Ex.A3 envisages on account of default in payment of installments the outstanding from the complainant as Rs.29,524/- towards the said vehicle loan availed by the complainant from the opposite party . But it does not provide of the particulars of the defaultive installments which has been bulged the outstanding to Rs.29,524/- by the date of EX.A3 . Nor the Ex.B3 envisages the total outstanding due from the complainant as Rs.29,524/- . Nor it envisages anywhere the bouncing of the post dated cheques alleged by the opposite party . In the absence of any cogent material envisaging the outstanding due of the complainant by the date of pre sale notice in Ex.A3 there appears any justification in the act of the opposite party in causing Ex.A3 pre sale notice demanding Rs.29,524/- and seizing the said vehicle under Ex.B1 and B2 , the opposite party himself appears to have felt any justification in its act of seizure and causing pre sale notice demanding Rs.29,524/- as outstanding , from its offer for returning the seized vehicle to the complainant vide Ex.B5. Further when it has seized the vehicle when any installment is due actually from the complainant under the pretext of default of installments are dishonor of some post dated cheques issued towards installments without any substantiating material to that effect taking law into hands in the absence of complainant , it will be upon the opposite party to delivery it to the complainant the vehicle honorably not taking any false prestige stand of complainant did not approached it for taking repossession of said vehicle . Hence in that aspect there appears every deficiency on the part of the opposite party towards the complainant .
8. The opposite party appears to be of deficient conduct from the very fact of not verifying its records properly before holding the complainant as defaulter and for seizing the vehicle high handedly in the absence of the complainant and causing pre-sale notice and ultimately realizing its mistake offering the return of the vehicle to the complainant and so the liability of the opposite party lies to compensate the mental agony and cost of the case to the complainant .
9. There appears any merit in the contention of the opposite party as to the aspect of want of jurisdiction to this forum to entertain the case as it has done all over tax of supra and pre-sale notice and causing notices without proper ascertainment of the matters when no default in payment of installments was there in actuality .
10. In the same way there appears any bonafidees in the contention of the complainant that at the time of the seizer of said vehicle it was having in it a registered sale deed , for want of any relevant particulars of it in complaint and any relief being sought by the complainant in that regard .
11. Consequently, the case of the complainant is allowed directing the opposite party to return to the complainant the said motor cycle No. AP 2 L 7522 in a fit and road worthy condition and to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.2,000/- as cost of the case within a month of receipt of this order. In default the supra stated amount shall be payable by the opposite party to the complainant with 12% interest from the date of default till realization.
12. This order does not prevent the opposite party from recovering any due installments pertaining to the said vehicle if still due , by permissible legal approach , in the light of the request of the complainant for a direction to the opposite party receive the loan amount in installments .
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 12th day of December, 2008.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant :Nil For the opposite parties :Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1. Letter dated 15-05-2007 as to cheque No.428361 dated
10-12-2006.
Ex.A2. Letter dated 15-05-2007 as to cheque No.428363dated 10-02-2007.
Ex.A3. Pre sale notice dated 28-07-2007.
Ex.A4. Reply to Ex.A3 dated 14-08-2007 along with postal receipt
and acknowledgement .
Ex.A5. Reply to Ex.A4 dated 20-08-2007 along with courier receipt.
Ex.A6. Inventory sheet.
Ex.A7. Covering letter dated 14-12-2007 to Ex.A6.
Ex.A8. Ledger extract dated 13-08-2007 of A/c.No.55020.
Ex.A9. Pass book A/c.No.55020.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:
Ex.B1. Xerox copy of general information of the asset.
Ex.B2. Xerox copy inventory sheet.
Ex.B3. Xerox copy of account statement from 10-12-2006 to 10-11-2008.
Ex.B4. Xerox copy of letter dated 20-08-2007 of OP to complainant .
Ex.B5. Xerox copy of letter of OP to complainant .
MEMBER PRESIDENT
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on
