By Sri. Jose V. Thannikode, President:-

The Complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act to direct the Opposite Party to issue no objection certificate to cancel the hire purchase endorsement and to pay cost and compensation for the deficiency of service.

2. Brief of the complaint:- The Complainant is the owner of the vehicle No. KL 03/M 3493. On 05.11.2009 the Complainant availed loan of Rs.3,00,000/- from the 1^st Opposite Party through the 2^nd Opposite Party who is the agent of 1^st Opposite party. The

1^st Opposite Party issued a repayment chart to the complaint on 05.11.2009. As per the chart the Complainant is bound to repay the loan amount at Rs.14,000/- each in 20 monthly installments and 10 monthly installments at the rate of Rs.12,700/-. The Complainant promptly repaid the loan amount as per chart. Hence the 1^st Opposite Party closed the loan on 04.04.2012 by accepting 11,700/-. After repayment of entire loan amount as per the chart the Opposite Party has failed to cancel the endorsement regarding Hypothecation. Hence the complainant issued a lawyer notice on 09.08.2012 demanding the 1^st Opposite Party to issue the clearance certificate and demanding sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation. Though the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties accepted notice they did not issued clearance certificate or paid the compensation. The Complainant had paid the loan amount without any delay as per the chart. No liability is existing with the Opposite Party at present. But the reply notice the 1^st Opposite Party stated that there was a clerical mistake and they are demanding 5 more installments as the monthly installments of Rs.12,700/- each. The 1^st Opposite Party had obtained signature of the Complainant upon various papers to use it in a subsequent stage as and when they required. Hence this complainant strongly suspect that they will manipulate such signed papers for the unfair trade practice. The Complainant is no way liable to pay additional amount as required the Opposite Party. Subsequent demand of payment after clearing the liability as per chart will amounts to deficiency of service, unfair trade practice and exploitation. This complainant limited the claim as Rs.2,00,000/- towards the loss due to denial of clearance certificate in time. The Complainant could not sell the vehicle due to the hypothication endorsement upon the registration certificate. The Complainant is entitled to get the cancellation of the Hypothecation endorsement upon registration certificate.

3. Therefore prayed before the Hon'ble Forum may kindly pass an order directing:-

1. 1. 1. The 1^st Opposite Party to issue no objection certificate to cancel the

1. 1. hypothecation endorsement upon registration certificate of the vehicle No.KL03/M 3493.

2. If the 1^st Opposite Party failed to issue no objection certificate, direct the 3^rd

Opposite Party to cancel the hypothecation endorsement without no objection

certificate from the 1^st Opposite Party.

3. The 1^st Opposite Party to pay sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation for loss

sustained by the Complainant with cost of this proceedings.

4. Notice were served to Opposite Parties and Opposite Party No.1 appeared and filed version. Opposite Party No.2 and 3 not appeared and set exparte. In the version 1^st Opposite Party denied all the allegations, averments and assertion in the complaint except to the extent those that are specifically admitted hereunder. And further stated that the complaint itself is against the settled position of law and against the provisions of executed hire purchase agreement and opposed natural justice, hence the petition is liable to be dismissed in limine and further stated that the Complainant has no locus standi to file the complaint. The dispute between the Complainant and this opposite Party are not come under the purview of consumer protection act. The same is a money transaction and no consumer relationship between the Complainant and this Opposite Party, and it is a dispute in civil matter which is to be tried in a competent civil court in Chennai. The prime document depending the Complainant is the hire purchase agreement executed by the Complainant and Opposite Party and as per the agreement the Complainant has no locus standi to file the complaint before this Hon'ble Forum and prayed that the complaint may be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

5. The complaint is an experimental to embezzle money from this Opposite Party and if it is allowed and to be proceeded, it gives a bad impression to the society. The Complainant utilized the money of this Opposite party, defaulted the repayment and initiated the prosecution against this Opposite party for protracting the recovery of the balance instalments and other charges.

6. And further stated that the averment in paragraph No.1 and 2 are to be proved by the Complainant. The averment in 3^rd paragraph regarding the availing of the loan, it is admitted that this Opposite Party provided finance for the Mahindra LMV Motor car of the complainant bearing No.KL 3/M 3493 and as per the convenience of the Complainant, this Opposite Party provided, instalment facility to the Complainant with the promise of strict payment of the instalment in due time and to pay additional hire charges for delayed payment. The Complainant defaulted 5 installments of Rs.12,700/- each and Rs. 1,000/-. The story of entrustment of blank cheques and blank signed papers are not known to this Opposite Party. The registration certificate is entrusted to the Complainant with proper receipt after endorsement of the Hire purchase in the Registration certificate. The Complainant has to pay the remaining installments in the chart and additional hire charges. The Complainant is not came with unclean hand.

7. The claim of the Complainant that the entire installments and registration certificate of the vehicle was given to the Opposite Party is false and claim of the clearance certificate is not tenable and without settling the account, this Opposite Party could not issue the loan clearance certificate without complying the terms in the hire purchase agreement. The Complainant is well aware that the Opposite Party is entitled for the remaining installments in the chart and additional hire charges, but suppressing the facts and submitting false and fabricated statements with knowledge that the submitted facts are false with an intention to harass this Opposite Party.

8. The averment in the complaint regarding the averment of unfair trade practices is not true or correct. The Complainant is not entitled for the compensation for mental agony and hardship, but at the same time this Opposite Party is entitled for the loss and damages from the Complainant and hence prayed before the Forum to dismiss the petition with compensatory cost to the 1^st Opposite Party.

9. On going through the complaint, affidavit and version of 1^st Opposite Party the forum raised the following points for consideration.

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Relief and cost.

10. Point No.1:- In addition to the complaint, the Complainant filed proof affidavit and in the affidavit he stated as stated in the complaint. He is examined as PW1 and Ext.A1 to A5 is marked and Ext.B1 is also marked from the side of 1^st Opposite Party. Ext.A1 is the copy of Registration certificate of the disputed vehicle. Ext.A2 is the repayment chart/book issued by the 1^st Opposite Party in which the address of 1^st Opposite Party is clearly printed in which 30 installments is clearly written thereafter “Hire Purchase monthly installments” is written. Ext.A3 series is the receipts issued by the Opposite Party to the Complainant which shows that as per the Ext.A2 chart the entire installments is remitted by the Complainant. Ext.A4 is the lawyer notice issued by the Complainant to 1^st Opposite Party which shows that 09.08.2012 itself the Complainant requested for no objection certificate and other documents from 1^st Opposite party. Ext. A5 is the reply notice given by the 1^st Opposite Party to the Complainant which shows that 1^st Opposite party demanding five more installments than Ext.A2. Ext.B1 is marked from the side of 1^st Opposite Party, it is the hire purchase agreement executed between Complainant and 1^st Opposite party. It shows that there is altogether 35 installments that is 20 installments for Rs.14,000/- and 15 installments for Rs.12,700/-.

11. On analysing complaint, version and affidavit and documents produced before the forum we are in the opinion that Ext.A2 is given by the 1^st Opposite party or his agent on behalf of 1^st Opposite party, anyway any document or chart is given to one party must be a complete one. If anybody feels that the chart given by the Opposite Party is a complete one we cannot blame him since it not contain “ continued” or any mention that this is first part etc... The word HP-MI it reveals only “Hire Purchase Monthly Installments” it does not indicate the continuation.

12. Ext.B1 is admitted by the Complainant but a copy of the same is not supplied by the 1^st Opposite Party to the Complainant. 1^st Opposite Party has also no case that the copy of Ext.B1 is supplied to complainant. It is pertinent to note that if there is an agreement one copy should be supplied to other party and it should be endorsed in the original agreement. Instead of this herein the 1^st Opposite Party has supplied an another chart. At the time of agreement the Complainant might not have verified the entire entries in the agreement and as per the chart given by the 1^st Opposite Party the Complainant remitted full installments without any default. It means that if the 1^st Opposite Party has supplied the copy of Ext.B1 the Complainant ought to have remitted the full installments. Hence we feel that what is given to the Complainant after executing an agreement is a final one and as per that chart complainant remitted the full installments in time. Hence the point No.1 is found accordingly infavour of the complainant and we find that without giving actual copy of agreement or chart, demanding more amount and not issuing the no objection certificate is deficiency of service from the side of 1^st Opposite Party. Point No.1 is found accordingly.

13. Point No.2:- Since the point No.1 is found against the 1^st Opposite Party, 1^st Opposite party is liable to pay cost and compensation and required documents, and Complainant is entitled for the same.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and 1^st Opposite Party is directed to give No Objection certificate to cancel the hire purchase endorsement in the registration certificate of the Complainant for the vehicle bearing No.KL 03M 3493 and also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand) only as cost and compensation to the Complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order. In the event of non compliance of the order by the 1^st Opposite Party within 30.08.2014, the 3^rd Opposite Party is directed to cancel the hypothecation endorsement upon registration certificate of the

vehicle No.KL 03M 3493 on request of the complainant.

Dictated to the CA, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum on the 19^th day of June 2014.

Date filing : 27.11.2012.

PRESIDENT: Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

/True Copy/

Sd/-

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

A P P E N D I X

Witness for the Complainant:

PW1. Mathew. M Complainant.

Witnesses for the Opposite Parties:

OPW1. Faizal Business.

OPW2. Unnikrishnan Auto consultancy.

Exhibits for the Complainant:

A1. Copy of Certificate of Registration.

A2. Repayment chart/Book.

A3 series Receipts.

A4. Lawyer notice. dt:09.08.2012.

A5. Reply Notice. dt:14.08.2012.

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:

B1. Hire Purchase Agreement. dt:05.11.2009.