CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD
Dated this the 13th day of February 2014
PRESENT : SMT. SEENA. H, PRESIDENT
: SMT. SHINY. P.R, MEMBER
: SMT. SUMA. K.P, MEMBER Date of filing : 12/9/2013
CC / 164 / 2013
M. Vijaya Kumar,
“Santhosh Niwas”,
Kallipadam (P.O), Kulapully,
Shoranur, Palakkad – 679 122. : Complainant
Vs
The Managing Director,
M/s. Sriram Transport & Finance Co. Ltd.,
2nd Floor, Sunshine Complex,
T.B. Road, Opp. Alukkas Jewellery,
Palakkad – 678 015. : Opposite party
O R D E R
BY SMT. SEENA. H, PRESIDENT
Brief case of the complainant :-
Complainant has purchased a three wheeler goods carrier which was hypothecated to opposite party in the year 2006. Even after payment of the whole dues opposite party failed to return the original Registration Certificate (RC) which was obtained by opposite party as collateral security. Complainant has filed a case before Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Palakkad as CC/55/09 in which Forum ordered compensation of Rs. 20,000/- along with a direction to return the original RC. It was taken up in Appeal by opposite party, but was dismissed. There after Execution Petition filed. Opposite party filed Revision before Hon’ble Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, where it was ordered to secure the duplicate copy of the RC along with 25,000/- as compensation. Now the present complaint is filed for the total pecuniary loss suffered by the petitioner on account of the total defunct conditions of the vehicle. It is submitted that when the deficiency in service continued and resulted in total loss/damages to the complainant and award of compensation must be based upon the appropriate quantification of loss. Hence complainant prays Rs. 3,00,000/- on account of loss suffered along with Rs. 1,60,000/- for the loss of earnings and Rs. 20,000/- towards Sundry expenses and 8,400/- as the additional tax imposed and paid by complainant and Rs.10,000/- as exemplary damages.
Opposite party filed Interim Application to hear regarding the maintainability of the complaint. It is stated that relief prayed for in the above complaint are one and the same which have been agitated and decided already by the Forum. It is stated that without going for a cross appeal, complainant is trying to make out a new cause of action for getting unjust enrichment.
Heard both parties regarding maintainability of the case before the Forum. Forum vide order in IA/401 A/13 dated 6/2/2014 found the complaint not maintainable before the Forum.
Hence without going in to the merits of the case, we dismiss the complaint.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 13th day of February 2014
Sd/-
Smt. Seena. H
President
Sd/-
Smt. Shiny. P.R
Member
Sd/-
Smt. Suma. K.P
Member
