Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

183/2013

K.Ramachandran - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager,Sriram City union Finance Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.Govind Chandrasekar-com

28 Jul 2016

ORDER

                                                            Complaint presented on:  25.09.2013

                                                                Order pronounced on:  16.08.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,           MEMBER II

 

TUESDAY THE 16^th    DAY OF AUGUST 2016

 

C.C.NO.183/2013

 

 

K.Ramachandran,

S/o P.K.S.Nair,

6/178 MMDA,

Mogappair West,

Chennai – 600 037.

                                                                                    ..... Complainant

 

..Vs..

1.The  Manager,

Sriram City Union Finance Ltd.,

44, 1^st Floor, 2^nd Avenue,

Anna Nagar,

ING Vysya Bank Upstairs,

Chennai – 600 083.

 

2.The Manager,

SVS Automobiles,

SPK Towers, SP-47,

Ambattur Industrial Estate,

Thirumangalam,

Vavin Main Road,

Chennai – 600 058.

	.....Opposite Parties

 

Date of complaint                                 : 25.09.2013

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s. Govind Chandrasekhar

Counsel for 1^st  opposite party                 : M/s.K.Ganesan

 

Counsel for 2^nd Opposite Party                     : Mr.Narayanan

 

 

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant availed a loan of Rs.8,000/- from the 1^st Opposite Party for the purchase of the vehicle agreeing to repay the said loan at the rate of Rs.2,750/- per month in 8 installments. The Complainant repaid the entire loan amount and the 1^st Opposite Party also issued a clearance certificate on 16.08.2011. The Complainant requested the 1^st Opposite Party on several occasions to return the original registration (RC) certificate. The 1^st Opposite Party directed him to obtain the RC from the 2^nd Opposite Party. When the Complainant approached the 2^nd Opposite Party, he replied that the RC was not with him and it should be with the 1^st Opposite Party. The 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties have failed to return the RC to the Complainant. Hence the Complainant issued legal notice to them. The 2^nd Opposite Party replied for the notice. However the RC was not returned to the Complainant and hence the Complainant filed this Complaint claiming a sum of Rs.20,000/-  from the Opposite Parties for  having failed to return the RC  and also compensation for mental agony with cost of the Complaint.

2. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE   1^st OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

          This Opposite Party admits that he had financed to the Complainant to purchase the vehicle and the Complainant repaid the entire loan and he had also issued the  No due certificate on 16.08.2011.  The Complainant after discharging the entire loan amount due and payable by him approached this Opposite Party on 16.08.2011 for return of the Original documents namely Original Registration Certificate, No due Certificate and Forum 35 for the purpose of cancellation of endorsement. This Opposite Party has also delivered all the documents on 16.08.2011 namely Original Registration Certificate in relation to his vehicle  bearing  No.TN-02-AL-4249, No Due Certificate and Form 35 and executed necessary acknowledgement in the Delivery Register maintained by the 1^st Opposite Party and Complainant has also, mentioned his cell No.9444743869 and the above said endorsement has been duly recorded in the Serial No.10887 of the Delivery Register maintained by the 1^st Opposite Party herein. Therefore this Opposite Party has not committed any Deficiency in Service and prays to dismiss the Complaint.

3. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE   2^nd  OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant purchased TVS Excel Super Heavy Duty vehicle bearing registration No.TN 02 AL 4249 from them and paid advance amount and subsequently went for loan with the 1^st Opposite Party and 1^st Opposite Party had paid the balance amount to them and after full payment the 2^nd Opposite Party sold the vehicle to the Complainant. The transaction transpired between the Complainant and the 1^st Opposite Party had nothing do to with this Opposite Party. After selling a vehicle the 2^nd Opposite Party does not have any transaction with the Complainant.  At no point of time the Complainant approached this Opposite Party for the return of RC. Having this Opposite Party received the entire cost of the vehicle; there is no necessity for him to retain the RC. Hence this Opposite Party had not committed any Deficiency in Service and prays to dismiss the Complaint.

4. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what relief?

5. POINT NO :1

           It is an admitted fact  that the Complainant availed a loan of Rs.8,000/- from the 1^st Opposite Party for the purchase of the vehicle and agreeing to repay the said loan at the rate of Rs.2,750/- per month in 8 installments  and the Complainant repaid the entire loan amount  and the 1^st Opposite Party also issued Ex.A2 clearance certificate on 16.08.2011 along with Ex.A3 Form 35 and Ex.A1 is the Registration Certificate of the vehicle contains the hypothecation endorsement  in favour of the 1^st Opposite Party.

          6. According to the Complainant after clearing the loan amount he demanded the 1^st Opposite Party to return the original RC book with other documents and thereafter on the direction of the 1^st Opposite Party demanded the same with the 2^nd Opposite Party and however both the Opposite Parties replied that they were not having the same and hence he has filed the Consumer Complaint.

          7. The 1^st Opposite Party replied that as per entry in serial number 10887 in  Ex.B1 ledger maintained by him  for the RC book issued to the parties, the Complainant signed in the said entry and received the RC book on 16.08.2011 and therefore this Opposite Parties already handed over the same and the 2^nd Opposite Party would contend that after he sold the vehicle to the Complainant for consideration he had no truck with the Complainant and therefore both the Opposite Parties prays to dismiss the Complaint.

          8. Ex.B1 ledger for RC book issue register maintained by the 1^st Opposite Party. As per entry in Ex.B1 in serial number 10887 dated 16.08.2011 the Complainant signed and received his RC book. The Complainant denies that the signature found in the said entry is not that of him. To believe such contention of the Complainant no supporting evidence is filed by him. Further in the Complaint itself, there is no pleading averred by him that when and under what circumstances he has entrusted the RC book to him. Further the 1^st Opposite Party specifically pleaded in the written version that under Ex.B1 the Complainant already received the RC book from him. This fact was not denied by the Complainant in his proof affidavit. Therefore the Ex.B1 entry in serial number 10887 and pleading of his written version of the 1^st Opposite Party proved that he had delivered the RC book to the Complainant is accepted. Having the RC book delivered by the 1^st Opposite Party to the Complainant on 16.08.2011, it establishes that the 2^nd Opposite Party is not in possession of the RC book and therefore we hold that the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service.

9. POINT NO :2

          Since the Opposite Parties have not committed any deficiency in service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief in this Complaint and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

          In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.     

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 16^th  day of August 2016.

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 19.03.2010                   Form of Certificate of Registration

 

Ex.A2 dated 16.08.2011                   Clearing Certificate (for vehicles) issued by

                                                Shriram City after loan is cleared.

 

Ex.A3 dated 16.08.2011                   Form 35 issued by the 1^st Opposite Party to

                                                Complainant

 

Ex.A4 dated 12.04.2012                   Acknowledgement card evidencing receipt of

                                                Legal notice by the 2^nd Opposite Party

 

Ex.A5 dated 14.04.2012                   Reply notice issued by 2^nd Opposite Party to

                                                counsel for Complainant

 

Ex.A6 dated 14.04.2012                   Notice issued by 2^nd Opposite Party to 1^st Opposite

                                                    Party regarding release of Registration Certificate

 

Ex.A7 dated 17.04.2012                   Acknowledgement card evidencing receipt of

                                                Legal notice by the 1^st Opposite Party

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE  1^st OPPOSITE PARTY :

 

Ex.B1 dated  NIL                    Ledger Book maintained by the 1^st Opposite Party

                                                while handing over the original R.C.Book

 

 

Ex.B2 dated NIL                     Ledger Book maintained by the 1^st Opposite Party

                                                when the Borrower has authorized his Agent to

                                                collect the Registration Certificate

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE 2^nd  OPPOSITE PARTY:

 

 

                                                …..NIL ……

 

 

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT