BEFORE THE DISTRICT FOUM: KURNOOL

Sri K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President

And

Smt C. Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Member

R.Ramachandra Reddy, B.Com., LLB., Member

Wednesday the 31^st day of August, 2005

CD NO. 138/2004

S.Suresh Babu,

S/o. Parasuramaiah,

R/o H.No. 18/58A Laxmi Nagar,

Kurnool.                                                               . . . Complainant

  -Vs-

The General Manager,

M.G. Brothers Finance ltd.,

By name Veeranna Setty,

Opp Police Control Room,

Upstairs, Municipal Complex,

Kurnool.                                                               . . . Opposite party

          This complaint coming on 30.08.2005 for arguments in the presence Sri A.Prabhakara Reddy, Advocate for complainant and Sri B.V.Ramana Reddy, Advocate for opposite party and stood over for consideration till this day the Forum made the following.

O R D E R

(As per Sri K.V.H.Prasad, President)

1.       This Consumer Disputes case of the complainant is filed under section 12 of CP Act seeking direction on the opposite party to pay to the complainant Rs.22,145/- with interest at 12 % per annum, Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as costs alleging the seizure of the car by the opposite party on default of payment of monthly installments under hire purchase agreement and sale of it for Rs.48,000/- with out any notice to the complainant and demanded Rs.4,752’/- instead of refunding the balance amount of Rs. 22,145/- after adjustments from the sale amount the amounts of installments already paid.

2.       In pursuance of the receipt of the notice of this Forum as to this case of the complainant, the opposite party caused it appearance through his advocate and contested the case denying any liability and filing a written version alleging that still a due of Rs. 4,752/- from the complainant himself on adjustment of dues from the sale proceeds as from 9^th month on wards the complainant defaulted the payment of monthly installments and under the terms and conditions of hire purchase agreement under which the complainant got financial assistance of Rs.40,000/- for purchase of a car agreeing to repay the said amount in installments worked under said conditions in 24 monthly installments.

3.       In substantiation of the contentions while the complainant side has relied upon documentary record marked in Ex A.1 and A.2 besides to the sworn affidavit of himself and third party – P. Anwarkhan and the interrogatories and replies exchanged, the opposite party has relied upon documentary record in Ex B.1 besides to its sworn affidavit and interrogatories replies exchanged.

4.       Hence the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and there by his entitleness for the claim made:-

5.       The complainant obtained financial assistance of Rs. 40,000/- under Ex B.1 hire purchase agreement from the opposite party agreeing to repay the due sum in 24 monthly installments at the rate of  installments fixed there under.  The said Ex B.1 stipulates the terms and conditions which governs the transactions notice there in.  The execution of Ex B.1 being not denied by the complainant and as it bears his signature as its executants, there remains any doubt as to the binding nature of the conditions in corporated in the said Ex B.1 on the complainant.  From among the several conditions in corporated in said Ex B.1 the condition No. 18 (c )  conserving the contingency of default of payment of installments – empowers the opposite party as the owner of said car, even without notice to hirer, to sell the said car at a public or private sale or otherwise dispose off, hold, use , operate, lease to others or keep ideal such vehicle, all free and clear of any rights to the hirer and without any duty to account to hirer for such action or inaction or for any proceeds in respect there off.  Condition No. 18 (2 ) of Ex B.1 further subjects the hirer liable for all legal or other casts and expenses resulting from fore going defaults and from exercise of the owners remedies including position of any vehicles .  Condition No. 17 of Ex B.1 deals with the contingencies which constitutes the default.  Under the (a) of it failure to pay hirer charges or part there off or other payment requires under said agreement amounts to default admittedly the complainant has defaulted the payment of monthly installment amounts from 9^th month on wards making regular payments up to 7^th and a part amount in 8^th installment.  When the complainant becomes a defaulter by the virtue of the supra stated powers of the opposite party as owner of the said vehicle,  there remains any breach or violation of any conditions of agreement or legal or moral liabilities towards hirer.  Therefore, there appears no much merit and force in the contentions of the complainant as to disposal of said car seized from him on his default of payment of installments.

6.       Further when the complainant has executed the Ex B.1 consenting to it with his eyes wide open at that time, he cannot question now the validity of liability of him there under.  For example when the Ex B.1 fixed monthly installments at Rs.2,435/- per month and he agreed for it then, and made payments accordingly for some time, now he cannot question as to how it constitutes and the validities or otherwise therein.  In the same way the complainant cannot deviate form the condition for observance of which he agreed by the act of its execution by him abiding to them.  When the opposite party as owner of said vehicle, has unequivocal rights over the said car in default or violation of any of the conditions of Ex B.1 by the complainant as its hirer, the complainant is bound to pay all the incidental expenses and charges pertaining to said car till the complainant is discharged of his said contractual obligation under said Ex B.1 – hire purchase agreement.

7.       Questioning the correctness of loan agreement ledger in Ex A.1 and the loan schedule in Ex A.2 and the liability of complainant there under as hirer of said vehicle shall amount to the ascertaining of correctness account which shall be a subject mater of Civil Courts and not to any deficiency of service.

8.       Therefore, in the circumstances discussed of above the nature of grievance alleged by the complainant being not amounting to any deficiency of service of the opposite party which the Forum can suitably redress, the case of the complainant is falling out of the scope of the Consumer Protection Act and its provisions and so the complainant being not entitled to the reliefs sought, the complaint is dismissed with costs.

Dictation to the Stenographer, Typed to the dictation corrected by us pronounced in the Open Court this the 31^st day of August, 2005.

                                                PRESIDENT

          MEMBER                                                                       MEMBER

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

For the complainant                        For the opposite parties

                -Nil-                                                 -Nil-

List of Exhibits Marked for the complainant:-

Ex A.1 Loan agreement ledger as on 08.03.2004 addressed to

           the complainant.

Ex A.2 Loan schedule for installments amount of Rs. 56,000/-.

List of Exhibits Marked for the opposite party:- 

Ex B.1 Agreement dated 17.1.2003.

PRESIDENT

        MEMBER                                                 MEMBER

Copy to:-

1. Sri A.Prabhakara Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool for the complainant.

2. Sri B.V.Ramana Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool for the opposite party.

Copy was made ready on:

Copy was dispatched on:

Copy was delivered to parties: