ADV. RAVI SUSHA, MEMBER.
ADV. RAVI SUSHA, MEMBER.
This complaint for getting compensation and other reliefs.
The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows:
The complainant purchased a Hero Honda Motor Sycle having Reg.No.KL-02-Y 466 having Chassis No.0613 29F 02326 and Engine No.06B 29E 02436, that the complainant made initial payment of Rs.12,400/- for the rest of the amount the complaint obtained a vehicle loan from the 1st opp.party, that the loan amount was Rs.31,350/ with an E.M.I of Rs.1053/- for 36 months, that the payment of the EMI, the complainant issued 3 cheques of UTI Bank, Kollam branch and 33 cheques of ICICI Bank, Kollam Branch, that the complainant correctly paid EMI through cheques, while so the complainant could not operate the account of ICICI Bank, that complainant informed this to the 1st opp.party and 1st opp.party put forward a suggestion to the complainant that the 2nd opp.party’s collection executive shall collect the EMI directly from the complainant, that the 2nd opp.party’s collection executive collected 4 EMI, but not in consecutive months, thereafter the opp.parties willfully and intentionally not collected the EMI from the complainant and asked the complainant to remit the arrears in total with penalty for direct payment, defaulted payment and rep charges, that the complainant already paid a total of Rs.19,771/- towards the vehicle in favour of the opp.parties, while so on 4th June 2007 at 1015 AM when the complainant reached Kundara on his way to Puthoor, his work site, 2nd opp.party’s collection executive after a scuffle with the complainant unlawfully obtained possession of the vehicle from the complainant. Hence the complaint preferred the case.
The complainant filed this complaint on 15..6..2007 for getting compensation and cost. Opp.parties filed version. But after that they remained absent and did not adduce any evidence and even not cross examined the complainant. After hearing the complainant and perusing the chief affidavit and documents, an exparte order was passed 30..4..2009. During the pendency of execution petition, the opp.parties filed appeal before the Hon’ble Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram. Since the order of the Forum is not a consideration, it is set aside by the Hon’ble Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram. After that the Forum issued notice to the opp.parties to appear before the Forum and adduce evidence. But they did not appear before the Forum even after getting sufficient opportunities. That attitude of the opp.parties shows that they have no intention to appear before the Forum and adduce evidence, but only to lag the case with an intention that the complainant will not get any remedy. Hence we are constrained to pass another exparte order against the opp.parties. In this case during the pendency of even an interim injunction order against the opp.parties not to sell the disputed vehicle, the opp.parties sold the vehicle. That action itself shows the unfair trade practice of the opp.parties. On considering the entire evidence we are of the view that the complainant is entitled to get the relief.
In the result, the complaint is allowed. He opp.parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.5000/- as cost to the proceedings to the complainant. The order is to be complied with within one month from the date of receipt of the order.
Dated this the 12th day of March, 2012.
I N D E X
List of witnesses for the complainant
PW.1. – Rajesh
List of documents for the complainant
P1. – Retail Invoice cash credit receipt
P2. – Account statement extract [4 pages]
P3. – Resale notice
