Kerala

Malappuram

OP/04/130

Muhammed Koya - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager,M/s sreeram Investments - Opp.Party(s)

02 Sep 2008

ORDER


DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
MALAPPURAM
consumer case(CC) No. OP/04/130

Muhammed Koya
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

The Manager,M/s sreeram Investments
The Manager,M/s Sreeram Investments
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President, 1. Complainant purchased a vehicle KL-10G 4091 availing finance of Rs.3,00,000/- from opposite party. The loan was to be repaid in fixed instalments. Complainant paid the last instalment on 20-9-04. That opposite party failed to issue the hire purchase termination letter and demanded Rs.20,000/- as additional hire charges and inspection charges. Hence this complaint praying to direct opposite party to issue hire purchase termination letter and to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/-. 2. Opposite parties have not filed any version. A petition I.A.28/03 was filed by opposite party under Sec.8(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The agreement was not produced along with the application. This petition was dismissed on 24-3-08. Opposite party has not filed any counter affidavit. Thus there is no defence put forward on the side of opposite party in this case. Complainant filed I.A.144/08 seeking amendment of the complaint to incorporate a new prayer. The petition was allowed and thus presently complainant prays for refund of Rs.80,000/- from opposite party. 3. Evidence in this case consists of the affidavit filed by complainant and Exts.A1 to A6 marked on his behalf. Complainant has affirmed that he repaid Rs.4,65,000/-. Even then opposite party did not issue the hire purchase termination letter. That later opposite party demanded Rs.80,000/- and complainant was forced to pay the same. Exts.A5 series are the receipts for payment of instalments. The receipt dated, 08-02-07 is for the payment of Rs.80,000/-. On 10-02-07 as per Ext.A4 letter opposite party has issued the hire purchase termination letter. Thus the second relief prayed in the complaint has already been satisfied. Presently complainant prays for refund of the amount of Rs.80,000/- which is purported to be paid by him to opposite party during the pendency of this litigation. Though complainant has amended the complaint incorporating the prayer for refund of Rs.80,000/- there are no sufficient pleadings to substantiate on what circumstances he has made this payment. In Ext.A1 which is the repayment schedule, the first instalment is to be paid on 15-01-2001 and the last instalment was to be paid on 15-9-2004. Ext.A2 is the collection details of repayment made by complainant. It shows complainant has committed default of payment during some months. Though complainant contends that Rs.80,000/- was collected illegally the practical details of this contention is not supported by necessary pleadings or evidence. Without reliable evidence of the contention we are not impelled to accept it. Further opposite party has issued a receipt for the alleged payment. During the pendency of this case complainant has opted to pay the amount and in turn received the hire purchase termination letter without any protest. In such circumstances we do not consider that the contention raised by the complainant is just and proper. For the foregoing reasons we hold that complainant has failed to establish a case in his favour. 4. In the result, we dismiss the complaint with no order as to costs. Dated this 2nd day of September, 2008. Sd/- C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT Sd/- E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER APPENDIX Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A6 Ext.A1 : Photo copy of the repayment chart given by 1st opposite party to complainant. Ext.A2 : Photo copy of the collection details. Ext.A3 : Receipt for Rs.80,000/- from opposite party to complainant. Ext.A4 : Photo copy of the letter dated 10-02-07 from opposite party to Regional Transport Officer, Malappuram. Ext.A5 : Receipt for Rs.34,700/- from opposite party to complainant. Ext.A6 : Receipts (30 Nos.) from opposite party to complainant. Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil Sd/- C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT Sd/- E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER




......................C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI