SRI. JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT)

Filed on 17.02.2009

The complainant’s case is as follows; - The complainant availed a loan bearing No.PY 1014561 from 'The Centurian Bank of Punjab Ltd.  for the purpose of purchasing a two wheeler. For effecting repayment, 36 post dated cheque leaves were issued to the said bank. As per the agreement with the bank, the bank retained the original RC Book and duplicate key of the vehicle. The EMI was fixed as Rs.1199/- (Rupees one thousand one hundred ninety nine only). The complainant was keen on keeping his saving account sufficient with fund with a view to honour the cheque handed over to the Bank towards payment of the loan. In 2008, the said bank was taken over by the opposite parties. The complainant completed repayment of all the 36 installments on 26^th September 2008. In the mean time, the complainant was constrained to effect 5 installments in hard cash. The opposite parties imposed Rs 400/-(four hundred) each on various occasions as charges for causing the cheques bounced. The cheques bounced if any were due to the laxity and negligence on the part of the opposite parties by not presenting the cheques in time.  Similarly, on one occasion, the opposite party required Rs.1200/- (Rupees one thousand two hundred only) as bouncing charge. On payment of the same on 11^th December 2008 the opposite party issued to the complainant a receipt to the effect that the said amount was credited to the loan account as one of the EMI.  Moreover, even after the effecting repayment of 36^th installment, the opposite party sent a registered notice to the complainant demanding Rs.5333.27/-(Rupees five thousand three hundred thirty three and twenty seven paisa only). Though the opposite parties gave back the RC Book of the vehicle, the duplicate keys, five cheque leaves were not still delivered. That apart, the  endorsement of Hypothecations was not removed in the RC Book. The complainant is entitled to the refund of Rs.6, 826/-(Rupees six thousand eight hundred twenty six only) the amount of which the opposite party unlawfully received from the complainant.  The opposite parties acts and omissions caused inestimable mental agony and harassment to the complainant above and beyond monetary loss.  Aggrieved by this the complainant approached this Forum seeking refund of Rs.6,826/-(six thousand eight hundred twenty six) amongst other  reliefs.

2. Notices were sent. The opposite parties appeared before this Forum and filed detailed version. The opposite parties denied the version put forth by the complainant. According to the opposite party complainant made several defaults, and the cheques presented for 10^th, 11^th, 16^th installments etc. were bounced and paid by the complainant on belated dates. The amount paid by the complainant on 11^th December 2008 was adjusted to 35^th installment.  According to the opposite party, 36^th installment is still due from the complainant. In addition to this, the complainant is liable to pay bouncing and delay payment charges. Thus the complainant owed a total amount of Rs.5,384/-(Rupees five thousand three hundred and eighty four only) to the opposite parties.   The complainant is disentitled to any of the relief sought for and the complainant is only to be dismissed.

3.  The evidence of the complainant consists of the testimony of the complainant himself as PWl, and the documents Exts.Al  to A5 were marked. Ext. Al is the copy of the notice from the opposite party, A2 is the copy of the ledger of the loan account,  A3 series is the payment receipts, A4 series is the customer copy of the payment receipt and A5 is the copy of the pass book.  On the side of the opposite parties, the manager of the 1^st opposite party was examined as RWl and the documents  Bl to B3 were marked.  Ext.Bl is the copy of the  power of Attorney, B2series is the cheque leaves and  B3 is the statement  of  accounts.

               4.      Bearing in mind the contentions raised by the parties, the questions come up for

consideration are:-

                (a)   Whether the complainant caused default in the repayment of the 36^th

installment of the loan amount?

                 (b) Whether the party retain the duplicate key and the cheque leaves

unlawfully?

5. We perused the materials put on record by the parties. ExbA2 &A3 series show that the complainant has effected payment of the amount covering 36 installments. The materials produced by the opposite parties do not lend support to their contention that the complainant has defaulted several installments made payment of them belatedly. Even going by the contention of the opposite parties, only the last installment viz. the 36^th one is due by the complainant. Admittedly, the EMI amount is Rs.1199/- (Rupees one thousand one hundred and ninety nine only).  The opposite parties require the complainant to pay an amount of Rs.5384/- (Rupees five thousand three hundred eighty four only) to the opposite parties in the name of bouncing and delay charges.  Barring bare statements, the opposite parties did not let in substantial evidence to prove its case. As we have already observed, it is evident from Ext.A2 & A3 series documents that the complainant remitted the amount covering the entire installments. In the light of this, we hold that there is no substance in the contention of the version put forth by the opposite party. At the same time, it appears that the complainant does not let in any materials to show that the complainant remitted an excessive amount of Rs.6,826/- (Rupees six thousand eight hundred and  twenty six only) to the said Loan Account.  However, we are of the opinion that the there is deficiency on the part of the opposite parties.

           6.  For  the   forgoing discussion,  the  opposite  parties are directed  to  pay  to  the

complainant the five cheque leaves and the duplicate key of the vehicle withhold by the opposite parties. The opposite parties are further directed to cancel the hypothecation endorsement in the RC Book of the complainant and pay him an amount of Rs.3500/­(Rupees three thousand five hundred only) as compensation for the harassment the complainant substantiated at the hands of the opposite parties.  The opposite parties shall comply with the order within 30 days of the date of this order.

            In the result, the complaint is allowed.  The parties are left to bear their own cost.

            Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30^th day of November, 2009.

                                                                                                Sd/- Sri. Jimmy Korah:

                                                                                                Sd/- Sri. K. Anirudhan:

                                                                                                Sd/- Smt.N.Shajitha Beevi:

Appendix:-

Evidence of the complainant:-

PW1                -                       T.K.Gopalakrishna Pillai (Witness)

Ext.A1             -                       Copy of the notice from the opposite party

Ext.A2             -                       Copy of the ledger of the loan account

Ext.A3 series    -                       Payment receipts

Ext.A4             -                       Customer copy of the payment receipt

Ext.A5             -                       Copy of the Pass book

Evidence of the opposite parties:-

RW1                -                       Sumith P. Prasu    (Witness)

Ext.B1              -                       Copy of the Power of Attorney

Ext.B2 series    -                       Cheque leaves

Ext.B3              -                       Statement of account

// True Copy //

                                                                                                                        By Order

                                                                                                            Senior Superintendent

To

            Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.

Typed by:-pr/-

Compared by:-