By Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:

The complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 for an order directing the Opposite parties No.1 and 2 to issue no objection certificate to cancel the endorsement of loan in respect of KL 12C 6437 car and to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- for the deficiency of service and to pay the cost of the proceedings. And also for a direction to Opposite Party No.3 to cancel the loan endorsement in Registration Certificate of KL 12C 6437 without getting no objection from the financier.

2. The complainant's case in brief as follows:- The complainant purchased a car after availing loan from 2^nd Opposite Party through 1^st Opposite Party. The Finance amount was 2,70,000/- with repayment flat rate interest for 5 years was Rs.81,405/-. The endorsement of loan was done by 3^rd Opposite Party in the R.C book. The Complainant repaid the entire loan amount with flat interest within the stipulated time of 5 years. Now the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties are claiming huge amount for getting loan clearance certificate as overdue charges. The Complainant requested for loan clearance certificate from 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties, they never responded. A person entrusted by the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties approached the Complainant and demanded Rs.35,000/- as additional charges to issue the loan clearance certificate. So there is deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 and aggrieved by this the Complainant filed this complaint before the Forum.

3. On receipt of notices were issued to all the Opposite Parties and all Opposite Parties appeared before the Forum and filed version. In the version it is contented that the Complainant is not coming under consumer dispute and Complainant defaulted payment of instalments continuously and 18 cheques issued by Complainant towards instalment payment are dishonoured and Rs.24,556.94/- is payable by the Complainant as defaulted charges like document charge, stamp recovery, bank charges, legal expense etc. The Complainant is examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A3 are marked. Then the case is posted for Opposite Parties evidence. The Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 did not adduce any oral evidence and did not mark any documents on their side, the Opposite Party No.3 submitted that there is no oral evidence for them. So the evidence of Opposite Parties are closed and the case is posted for hearing. Heard the Complainant and Opposite Party No.3. Opposite Party No.1 and 2 were not present. On perusal of complaint, proof affidavit, documents of Complainant, version of Opposite parties, this Forum raised the following points for consideration.

1. Whether there is deficiency of service from the side of Opposite Parties?

2. What order as to cost and compensation?

4. Point No.1:- In addition to complaint the Complainant filed proof affidavit and filed 3 documents. Complainant is examined as PW1 and documents were marked as Exts.A1 to A3 series. Ext.A1 is the photocopy of Registration certificate of vehicle KL 12C 6437. Ext.A2 series 10 in numbers are the receipts of installment payment made by the Complainant to the Opposite Party No.1 and 2. Ext.A3 series 8 in numbers are the loan chart sheets. The documents Ext.A1 to A3 series will go to show that the loan taken by the Complainant is endorsed in the R.C book and Complainant had repaid the installment as per loan chart. The repayment are made with the stipulated tenure of loan. The contention of Opposite Party No.1 and 2 that the Complainant had defaulted in repayment within the prescribed time of several installment. There is delayed installment payment by the Complainant. It caused additional delayed payment charges and overdue charges. More over, 18 cheques issued towards installment payments by the Complainant have been dishonoured by the banker of the Complainant due to insufficient funds. It contributed bank charges of Rs.400/- per dishonour totaling Rs.7,200/- and collection agency charges of Rs.5,850/- and Rs.7,944.26 respectively. Legal charges Rs.2462.68, stamp recovery charges of Rs.800/-, other expense of Rs.300/- were also incurred by the Opposite Party No.1 and2. Altogether, a sum of Rs.24,556.94 is incurred by the Opposite Parties No.1 and 2. The 3^rd Opposite Party filed version to the effect that they did not receive any application from the Complainant to cancel the hire purchase endorsement in the Registration Certificate. Even though the Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 filed so many documents on their side to prove their case, the Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 did not appear the Forum for oral evidence and did not mark the documents. Hence the Forum by analyzing the evidence found that already Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 had levied flat rate interest of Rs.81,405 to the principal loan amount of Rs.2,70,000/- from the Complainant at the time of fixing the installment amount as per chart. Further overdue interest cannot be levied form the Complainant and it will be injustice. But Opposite Party can demand dishonoured charges and legal charges, stamp recovery charges and other expenses from the Complainant. Here in this case the Complainant had repaid the entire loan with the specified period as per chart. So collecting overdue charges, exorbitant collection agency charges etc from the Complainant is not fair and proper. The Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 demanding a total sum of Rs.24,556.94 from the Complainant for clearing the account. The Forum found that out of this Rs.24,556.94, the Complainant is liable to pay a dishonour charges of Rs.7,200/- legal charges of Rs.2462.68, stamp recovery charges of Rs.800/-, other expenses of Rs.300/- and collection agency charges of Rs.2,000/- in toto to the Opposite Party. So a total sum of Rs.12,762/- is payable by the Complainant towards the loan amount maintained by the Opposite party. The present issue is with respect to demanding of exorbitant amount as charges for the Complainant in order to close the loan amount. The Forum found that Rs.12,762/- is reasonable amount which the Opposite Party can demand from the Complainant for closing the account. Absolutely there is no deficiency of service on the side of the Opposite Parties No.1 to 3. So on getting Rs.12,762/- from the Complainant, the Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 shall issue no objection certificate to the Complainant. Point No.1 is found accordingly.

5. Point No.2:- Since there is no deficiency of service on the part of Opposite parties the Complainant is not entitled to get any cost and compensation from the Opposite Party.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 are directed to issue No Objection Certificate to the Complainant for the vehicle No. KL 12 C 6437 on payment of Rs.12,762/- (Rupees Twelve thousand Seven hundred and Sixty Two) only by the Complainant to Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 within one month of the date of this order. If the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 are not issuing No Objection Certificate even after getting Rs.12,762/- from the Complainant, the Opposite Party No.3 is directed to cancel the loan endorsement in the R.C Book of KL12C 6437 vehicle on production of receipt for Rs.12,762/- from the Opposite Party or any document to prove the remittance to the Opposite Party without waiting for the no objection certificate from 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties.

Dictated to the C.A transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 25^th day of March 2014.

Date of filing: 10.04.2012.

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. Rajan Babu Complainant.

Witness for the Opposite Parties:

Nil

Exhibits for the Complainant:

A1. Copy of Certificate of Registration. dt:30.09.2006.

A2 series (10 in numbers) Copy of Receipts.

A3 series (8 in numbers) Copy of Loan Chart.

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:

Nil.