BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM :: WARANGAL
Present : Sri D. Chiranjeevi Babu,
President.
And
Patel Praveen Kumar,
Member.
Monday, the 21st day of March, 2011.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.09/2010
Between:
Enabothula Ratnakar,
S/o Raghavaiah,
Age: 30 yrs, Occ:Student,
R/o H.No.16-4-222,
Fort Road,
Warangal.
… Complainant
And
1) The Manager,
HDFC Bank Limited,
Nakkalagutta Branch,
Nakkalagutta,
Warangal.
2) The Manager,
HDFC Bank Limited,
Retail Loans – Client Service Desk,
26-A, Narayan Properties,
Off: Saki Vihar Road,
Chandivilli, Andheri (East),
Mumbai – 400072.
… Opposite Parties
Counsel for the Complainant :: Sri P.Aravind, Advocate.
Counsel for the Opposite Parties :: Sri M.V.Kini, Advocate.
This complaint is coming for final hearing before this Forum, the Forum pronounced the following order.
CC 9/2010 -- 2 --
ORDER
Sri D.Chiranjeevi Babu, President
This complaint is filed by the complainant E.Ratnakar against the opposite parties under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for a direction to provide necessary documents for cancellation of the Hypothecation of the Centurion Bank of Commerce over the vehicle bearing NO.AP36 Q 2261 of the complainant, to pay Rs.20,000/- towards damages for non issuance of the necessary documents and also making the complainant to roam around the opposite party No.1 for providing the necessary documents and to award costs.
The brief averments contained in the complaint filed by the complainant are as follows:
The case of the complainant is that the complainant purchased Hero Honda bearing NO.AP36 Q 2261 on hypothecation from Centurion Bank of Punjab by entered into an agreement and the said Bank has obtained post dated cheques for repayment of loan amount. After payment of the entire loan amount, the complainant has received a letter addressed by opposite party No.2 regarding closure of loan of Centurion Bank including No Objection Certificate. The opposite party NO.1 informed that the Centurion Bank of Punjab was amalgamated with HDFC Bank and as such they have transferred all the loans of Centurion Bank to HDFC Bank. The complainant approached RTA Warangal to raise hypothecation, for which the R.T.A.Warangal raised objection as closure letter issued by H.D.F.C. Bank and requested to provide the closure certificate of Centurion Bank. The complainant requested the opposite party No.1 to provide necessary documents and to see the vehicle get relieved from Hypothecation. Accordingly the opposite party NO.1 gave Xerox copy of amalgamation letter to the complainant and the same was produced before R.T.A. Warangal. But the R.T.A. has replied that there is no signature on the said letter and to provide the said letter on the authenticate signature for cancellation of hypothecation. The opposite party No.1 has not given the said letter and dodged the matter on one or other pretexts. Vexed with the attitude of opposite parties, the complainant got issued legal notice on 15-12-2009 to opposite parties demanding to provide necessary documents for cancellation of hypothecation and to pay damages of Rs.20,000/-. But the complainant neither received the acknowledgment cards nor returned the R.P. covers.
CC 9/2010 -- 3 --
The act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service. Hence, filed this complaint praying to direct the opposite parties to provide necessary documents for cancellation of hypothecation of Centurion Bank over the vehicle of the complainant, to pay damages of Rs.20,000/- and costs.
The opposite parties filed the Written Version stating that the complainant has availed loan from Centurion Bank of Punjab. The Centurion Bank of Punjab is amalgamated with HDFC Bank and the complainant himself admitted that opposite parties have issued loan closure letter and also No Objection Certificate and also alleged that the letters issued by the opposite parties does not contain the signature. The complainant only asked for copy of certificate of amalgamation, immediately the opposite parties have provided the same to the complainant. After receipt of amalgamation, the complainant has not approached the opposite parties, hence, we are of the opinion that the problem might have solved. The complainant alleged that he has issued legal notice, but he himself admitted that he has neither received acknowledgment nor returned covers and requested them to dismiss this case.
The complainant in support of his claim, filed his Affidavit in the form of chief examination and also marked Exs.A-1 to A-7. On behalf of opposite parties Sri Varun Prajna Vardha filed his Affidavit in the form of chief examination but not marked any documents.
Now the point for consideration is:
1) Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) If so, to what Relief?
Point NO.1:-
No arguments advanced from opposite parties Advocate. After arguments of complainant side Advocate our reasons are like this:
Now this Forum has to see whether the complainant is entitled any damages of Rs.20,000/- from the opposite parties. For this our answer is that the complainant is not entitled to get anything from the opposite parties because we agreed with the complainant that there was some inconvenience caused to the complainant for getting the cancellation of Hypothecation letter from RTA, Warangal but after filing of this complaint, the counsel for complainant admitted that he already received Hypothecation letter from RTA Warangal for the vehicle of the complainant. Since already the complainant
CC 9/2010 -- 4 --
received cancellation of hypothecation letter there is no need to prolong the litigation in between them. We warn the opposite parties in future they have to act promptly with regard to producing documents to the complainant and other authorities. In this case we see no grounds to allow this complaint. Accordingly this point is decided in favour of the opposite parties against the complainant.
Point NO.2: To what Relief:- The first point is decided in favour of the opposite parties against the complainant this point is also decided in favour of the opposite parties against the complainant.
In the result, this complaint is dismissed without costs.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum today, the 21st March, 2011).
PRESIDENT Male Member
District Consumer Forum, Warangal
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
On behalf of Complainant On behalf of Opposite Parties
Affidavit of complainant filed. Affidavit of opposite parties filed.
EXHIBITS MARKED
ON BEHALF OF COMPLAINANT
1. Ex.A-1 is the Xerox copy of closure letter of HDFC Bank, dt.15-09-09.
2. Ex.A-2 is the Xerox copy of Amalgamation order issued by Reserve Bank of India, dt.20-05-08.
3. Ex.A-3 is the Xerox copy of No Objection Certificate dt.15-09-09.
4. Ex.A-4 is the office copy of legal notice issued to opposite parties, dt.15-12-2009.
5. Ex.A-5 and A-6 are Postal Receipts.
6. Ex.A-7 is the Reply from the opposite parties, dt.7-5-2010.
ON BEHALF OF OPPOSITE PARTIES
NIL
PRESIDENT
