DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, Civil Station, Palakkad 678001, Kerala
Dated this the 30th day of January, 2010
Present: Smt.Seena.H, President Smt.Preetha.G.Nair, Member Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K, Member
C.C.No.55/2009
M.Vijayakumar, Santhosh Nivas, Kallipadam(P.O), Kulapully, Shoranur – 679 122, Palakkad. (By Adv.Jairam & V.C.Janardhanan)
Vs
The Managing Director, M/s.Shriram Transport & Finance Co. Ltd., 2nd Floor, Sunshine Complex, T.B.Road, Opp. Alukkas Jewellery, Palakkad 678 015. (By Adv.P.Sreeprakash)
O R D E R
By Smt.Seena.H, President
Complainant has procured a Bajaj Minidor 3 wheeler goods carrier bearing Regn.KL-09 T2259 on 27.03.06 for Rs.2,08,800/- with the financial assistance of opposite party under Hire Purchase Agreement. The opposite party had fixed 42 EMI of Rs.4,400/- including the interest and cost, in full and final payment towards the total cost of the said vehicle. The original Registration Certificate was held by the opposite party as a collateral security. Complainant submits that he was informed that the original Registration Certificate would be handed over only when full and final settlement of the total amount to the opposite party. The grievance of the complainant is that he could not operate the vehicle in public road without the original Registration Certificate. As such from April 2008 onwards the vehicle could not be operated and had been kept idle. Owing to the above reasons, complainant approached the opposite party, who inturn assured that on full and final payment of the dues the Registration Certificate in original would be handed over to him. Accordingly complainant arranged funds from his relatives and known sources, on promise of payment of interest at bank rates, paid an amount of Rs.82,500/- as full and final payment
in satisfaction of the debts and the same was acknowledged by the opposite party. Opposite party had also forwarded No Objection to the Regional Transport Officer on 09.10.08 for cancellation of hypothecation as endorsed in the Registration Certificate. Thereafter the opposite party has not handed over the Registration Certificate except Form No.35. This caused the complainant financial loss and mental agony. Hence the complainant caused a lawyer notice on 30.11.08 to the opposite party requesting to hand over the Registration Certificate in original. But opposite party did not reply. Complainant alleges that the above acts of opposite party amounts to deficiency in service on their part. Hence this complaint is filed seeking an order directing the opposite party to return the original Registration Certificate and to pay total amount of Rs.2,78,000/- under different heads.
Opposite party filed version contending the following. Opposite party admits the fact that the complainant entered into a hire purchase agreement with the opposite party. Opposite party was not following a practice of holding the original Registration Certificate as a collateral security. The original Registration Certificate was handed over to the complainant at the time of entering into the agreement itself. Opposite party denied the allegation of complainant that the Manager assured him to return Registration Certificate while making full payment. Opposite party admits that the complainant has made payment and NOC was issued by them. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part. Hence the complainant is not entitled to any compensation from the opposite party.
Complainant filed affidavit. Exts.A1 to A7 marked on the side of complainant. Opposite party has not filed affidavit. No documentary evidence on the side of opposite party. Issues for consideration; Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party? If so, what is the relief and cost?
Issues 1 & 2:
The specific case of the complainant is that even though the hire purchase agreement with the opposite party was terminated, opposite party has not returned the original Registration Certificate which was held by them as collateral security. Opposite
party has already forwarded letter of No objection to the Regional Transport Officer for cancellation of hypothecation as endorsed in the Registration Certificate. Thereafter opposite party has handed over to the complainant only Form No.35 and not the Registration Certificate in original. Complainant has submitted that a number of times he was charged by the motor vehicle authorities for not holding the original Registration Certificate.
The case of the complainant is proved by Ext.A1 to A7 documents. As admitted by the opposite party and also is evident from Ext.A3 that the complainant has cleared the whole dues. Ext.A5, lawyer notice dt.30.11.08 shows the positive steps taken by the complainant to settle the issue. Even though at a belated stage opposite party filed an application to receive version, it was allowed on terms. No affidavit or documents were produced by the opposite party in support of their contentions. The main contention raised by the opposite party is that they have not obtained the original Registration Certificate cannot be accepted in the absence of supporting evidence. Normally it is usual practice of the finance companies to hold the documents pertaining to the vehicle as collateral security. Since the opposite party has not adduced any evidence against the one tendered by the complainant, the evidence adduced by the complainant stands unchallenged.
Complainant has claimed a huge amount as compensation. It is settled position that consumer forum need to award compensation only for the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Non return of the original Registration Certificate amounts to deficiency in service and in our view an amount of Rs.20,000/- as compensation will meet the ends of justice.
In the result, complaint allowed. Opposite party is directed to return the original RC of the vehicle of the complainant together with Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) as compensation for the deficiency in service and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost of the proceedings. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of the order failing which the whole amount shall carry interest @ 9% p.a from the date of order till realisation.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 30th day of January, 2010. Sd/- Seena.H, President Sd/- Preetha.G.Nair, Member Sd/- Bhanumathi.A.K, Member Appendix Witnesses examined on the side of complainant Nil Witnesses examined on the side of opposite party Nil Exhibits marked on the side of complainant Ext.A1 – Photo copy of Form No.21 Sale Certificate Ext.A2 – Photo copy of Certificate of Fitness Ext.A3 – Photo copy of letter dt.09.10.08 sent by opposite party to Regional Transport Officer Ext.A4 – Memo sent by Joint Regional Transport Officer to complainant Ext.A5 – Photo copy of lawyer notice dt.30.11.08 sent by complainant to opposite party Ext.A6 – Demand Notice sent by Deputy Tahsildar, Ottapalam to complainant Ext.A7 – Payment receipt dtd.23.06.09 Exhibits marked on the side of complainant Nil Cost (Allowed) Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) | 
