Date of Filing : 20.06.2012

  Date of Order : 10.04.2012

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLAR

Dated 10^th APRIL 2012

PRESENT

Sri. H.V. RAMACHANDRA RAO, B.Sc., BL,   …….                PRESIDENT

Sri. T.NAGARAJA, B.Sc., LLB.                        ……..     MEMBER

Smt. K.G.SHANTALA, B.A., LLB.                    ……..     MEMBER

CC No. 154 / 2011

Sri. B.N. Adinarayana,

No. 1327, 1^st Main, Kurubarapet,

Kolar – 563 101.

(By M/s. V.K. Prashanth & Associates, Adv.)        ……. Complainant

V/s.

1. The Manager,

    L&T Finance Ltd.,

    #3/E, 3^rd Cross, Monarch Ramani,

    No. 3/E, 4^th Floor, 7^th ‘C’ Main, 3^rd Cross,

    3^rd Industrial Block, Koramangala,

    Bangalore.

2. The Manager,

    L&T Finance Limited,

    Registered Office: L&T House,

    N.M. Marg, Ballard Estate,

    Mumbai – 400 001.

3. The Manager,

    L&T Finance Limited,

    Corporate Office: The Metropolitan,

    8^th Floor, C-25/C-26, E-Block,

    Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East),

    Mumbai – 400 051.

    (By M/s. Krishnamurthy & Co., Adv.)                …… Opposite Parties

ORDER

By Sri. H.V. RAMACHANDRA RAO, PRESIDENT

The brief antecedents that lead to the filing of the Complainant made u/s. 12 of the C.P. Act seeking direction to the OPs to foreclosure of loan account and to pay to the Complainant compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- and OP to issue hypothecation cancellation letter with original RC Book of Tractor No. KA-07/T-8040 are necessary:

Complainant had availed Tractor loan of Rs.2,05,000/- from the Ops which is to be paid in 12 quarterly installments of Rs.22,465/- each commencing from 15.04.2007 and purchased Tractor bearing No. KA-07/T8040.  Complainant had paid all the 11 installments at Rs.22,465/- and OP has collected last installment of Rs.11,900/- as full and final settlement.  After payment of said amount, on 31.03.2010 Complainant requested the OPs to cancel the hypothecation and allow the Complainant to sell the vehicle and to purchase new vehicle.  OP1 visited the Complainant on 10.09.2010 and told that 2 installments have not been paid and cheque has been dishonoured.  Complainant clarified and told that cheque has been encashed by OP on 26.07.2007.  Then OP1 collected Bank statement in original and said that they will close the loan account.  On 26.05.2011 Ops 2 & 3 have issued legal notice calling upon the Complainant to pay Rs.84,255/- with 36% interest P.A. which was received by the Complainant on 05.06.2011.  Complainant explained the matter to the OP stating that he is not liable to pay any amount. Hence the Complaint.

2.       In brief the version of the Ops are:

          On 11.01.2007 loan-cum-hypothecation agreement was executed between the parties and certain amounts were sanctioned.  The Complainant has paid following amounts:

and accordingly OP has issued No Objection Certificate and No Due Certificate.  Complainant is not a consumer.  The transaction is between the parties as loanee & loaner.  As per loan agreement there is an arbitration clause.  Hence, Complaint be dismissed.

3.       To substantiate their respective cases, Complainant has filed Memo stating that his complaint and documents be read as his evidence.  OP has filed affidavit and documents.  Complainant has filed written arguments.  Arguments were heard.

4.       The points that arise for our consideration are:

POINTS

          (A)     Whether there is deficiency in service ?

          (B)     What order ?

5.       Our findings are:

          (A)     Positive

          (B)     As per detailed order for the following reasons

REASONS

6.       Reading the pleadings in conjunction with the affidavits and documents on record, it is an admitted fact that the Complainant had taken certain loan from the OPs for purchase of Tractor and it has to be paid in installments of Rs.22,465/- for 12 months and first installment commenced from 22.05.2007.  Complainant has given statement of accounts with respect to amount paid by him which reads thus:

OP has given its statement of accounts regarding the money received which reads thus:

That is to say parties have admitted the payment.  The Complainant has given details of Cheque Number, date and the amount paid, but Ops never stated the Cheque numbers by which they received the amount and when they have encashed it.  OP simply said that they have received the amount on certain dates and there is certain delay.  If the OP has not encashed the Cheque, it is for them to answer and the Complainant cannot be considered as defaulter.  Even the Bank statement produced by the Complainant goes to show that Cheques have been encashed by the Ops and it is cleared.  The entire amount is paid as agreed i.e., Rs.2,59,015/- and there is no due payable by the Complainant.  But, the Ops have collected Rs.2,69,850/-.  Anyway, the entire amount is cleared.

7.       OP issued notice on 26.05.2010 demanding certain amounts from the Complainant.  When the entire amount has been received and encashed by the Ops and nothing is due, then demanding of money from the Complainant is nothing but deficiency in service.

8.       In any event, on 09.09.2011, according to the Ops that too after filing of this Complaint they have issued No Due Certificate and No Objection  Certificate with respect to the vehicle loan and they have enclosed copies of the said Certificates to this Forum.  This is subsequent to the filing of this Complaint.  In this case, it is seen that on 25.07.2011 Ops though served remained absent.  On 27.08.2011, one Advocate had undertaken to file vakalath for Ops, but on 18.10.2011 another Advocate undertook to appear for some of the Ops.  But only on 13.12.2011 Ops filed vakalath, version and documents.  That means, they dodged the Complainant and  admittedly these Certificates are issued.  When the “No Due Certificate” and “No Objection Certificate” are issued, it means account is foreclosed and nothing is due.  The original RC is with the Ops which has not been returned and this has to be returned.  This is deficiency in service.  If we order certain amount as compensation, that will meet the ends of justice.  Hence, we hold the point accordingly and pass the following order:

ORDER

1.       Complaint is allowed in part.

2.       OPs are directed to return original RC of Tractor bearing Registration No. KA-07/T-8040 to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of this order. 

3.       OP shall pay Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) as compensation to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of this order.

4.       OPs are also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as costs of this litigation to the Complainant.

5.       Ops are directed to send the amount to the Complainant as ordered at (3) & (4) above by Demand Draft with RC as ordered at (2) above through RPAD and submit to this Forum the compliance report with necessary documents within 45 days.

6.       Send copy of the Order to the parties concerned free of cost.

7.       Return extra sets to the parties concerned under Regulation 20(3) of Consumer Protection Regulations 2005.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected and pronounced in the open Forum on this the 10^th day of April 2012)

T. NAGARAJA          K.G.SHANTALA           H.V.RAMACHANDRA RAO

    Member                         Member                                       President