- Sri Bhairab Chell,
Village and P.O. Angadpur,
Durgapur, Dist. Burdwan, Pin-713215. _________ Complainant
____Versus____
- The Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
“Commercial Vehicle Section” – Calcutta,
7th Floor, Ck, Appejay House,
15, Park Street, Kolkata-16.
- The Manager,
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
“Commercial Vehicle Section” – Calcutta,
7th Floor, Ck, Appejay House,
15, Park Street, Kolkata-16. ________ Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, Hon’ble President
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member
Order No. 11 Dated 17-12-2014.
The case of the complainant in short is that complainant approached the o.ps. for disbursing a loan for purchasing a vehicle in the year 2007. O.ps. agreed to finance the complainant a substantial amount of loan to the tune of Rs.8,45,000/- with a stipulation that the loan would repaid by the complainant in 46 installments. Following the rules and regulations of RBI, O.ps. had financed a sum of Rs.8,45,000/- to the complainant on 26.11.07 by an Agreement No.CV-1580889. Accordingly, the EMI was fixed @ Rs.24,500/- by 44 installments from 1.2.08 till 1.9.11 and the last two installments @ Rs.9000/- each for the months of October and November 2011. Though the agreement was entered into by and between complainant and o.ps., o.ps. did not hand over any papers relating to such agreement. On the other hand, they had supplied only a chart showing the mode of payment indicating the amount of installment and the dates for such payment. O.ps. initially took 14 post dated cheques from the complainant. After obtaining such loan the complainant purchased a vehicle bearing no.WB67 6298 which is BS II model vehicle. Complainant also obtained a permanent state garage permit from Regional Transport Authority, Bankura for the rout Bishnupur to Durgapur Railway Station via Sonamukhi, Rangamati, Barjora, etc. Due to old age of the said vehicle the complainant is unable to ply the said vehicle smoothly. The complainant paid the installments to o.ps. by way of handing over cheque in advance. Complainant paid EMI @ Rs.24,500/- from 1.2.08 to 1.9.11 i.e. 44 EMIs and the rest two cheques were paid for the months of Oct. and Nov. 2011. As the complainant has paid EMI in a very sincere manner o.ps. selected the complainant for further loan of Rs.3,80,000/- by their letter dt.27.10.10. After payment of all EMIs complainant had approached the o.p. bank for issuance of No Objection Certificate and to issue Form No.35 of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 for the purpose of deletion of the name of the financer i.e. hypothecation agreement from the registration certificate of the vehicle in question. But o.ps. did not pay any heed. Then the complainant sent an advocate’s letter on 29.5.11 to o.ps. but in vain. Therefore, complainant has filed the instant application with prayer for direction to issue a No Objection Certificate for deleting the hypothecation from the registration certificate of the vehicle in question and to issue Form No.35 dully filled in and signed by o.ps. along with compensation.
O.ps. did not contest the case by filing w/v and accordingly the case is heard ex parte against the o.ps.
Decision with reasons:
We have gone through the evidence of the complainant and documents in particular. It is admitted fact that o.ps. had disbursed a loan of Rs.8,45,000/- to the complainant by an agreement dt.26.11.07 by and between the parties. As per terms and conditions of the agreement the complainant had paid all 46 EMIs to o.ps. From the chart given by o.ps. we have observed that all the installments were paid by complainant and lastly due balance shows ‘nil’. Complainant has also annexed the photocopy of bank pass book which clearly shows that all installments were paid by complainant and amount was credited to o.p. bank. The complainant had paid the EMIs in a very sincere manner. So it is evident all the installments were paid by complainant. O.ps. did not appear and challenge any documents. Due to unchallenged testimony we have nothing to disbelieve the documents filed by complainant and as such, there is deficiency in service on the part of o.ps. by not issuing No Due Certificate and Form No.35. So, the complainant has substantiated his case and he is entitled to get relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the case is allowed ex parte against the o.ps. with cost. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to issue No Due Certificate to the complainant for the Agreement No.CV 1580889 and to issue Form No.35 duly filled in and signed by o.ps. and are further directed to pay to the complainant compensation of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
