CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
PALAKKAD, KERALA
Dated this the 31st day of December, 2011.
Present: Smt. Preetha. G. Nair, Member
: Smt.Bhanumathi. A. K, Member Date of filing: 24/11/2010.
CC / 158 / 2010
Senthilkumar,
S/o. K. Muthukumar,
Chittur Taluk,
Ozalapathi Village,
Velanthavalam (p.o),
Palakkad Dt. - Complainant
(BY ADV. G. ABHILASH)
Vs
1. The Managing Director,
Bajaj Auto Finance Limited (Auto),
Akrudi, Pune, Maharashtra,
India- 411 035.
2. The Manager,
Bajaj Auto Finance Limited (Auto),
C/o Bajaj Auto Limited 4th Floor,
Manjooran Estate,
Cheranellur Road,
Edappalli, Near Sai Service Station,
Cochin – 682 024. - Opposite parties
(BY ADV. B. KAMAL CHAND)
O R D E R
BY SMT. BHANUMATHI. A.K, MEMBER
The case of the complainant:
The complainant entered in to Hire purchase agreement with opposite parties for the purchase of a Bajaj Platina Motor Bike on 11/08/2006 as per the agreement No. 452033034. As per the terms of agreement the respondent company financed Rs. 38,000/- to petitioner and the petitioner agreed to repay the amount through 36 equal instalments at the rate of Rs. 1,373/- every month, for which the petitioner issued 36 post dated cheques to the company on the agreement date. The period of agreement elapsed on 02/08/2009 and after the completion of the agreement period the complainant approached the opposite parties for clearing the documents it was informed that there was a due of Rs. 6,091 as two cheques, one for October 2008 and other one for August 2009 were dishonoured. Then the complainant enquired the same with the bank and it was known that only cheque of August 2009 was dishonoured. To pay the dues as stated by the opposite parties the complainant went to opposite party office at Trissur as the Palakkad office was closed in the year 2007 without informing its closure to the customers. From there he was informed that they cannot receive the amount as it is a matter concerned with Palakkad Branch. From the Trissur office the complainant got the number of one person by name Suresh who was told to be the collection agent dealing with the Palakkad branch. When the complainant contacted him he told that he too cannot receive the amount as he has no details about petitioner's dues. After several queries and sending E-mail one Superior by name Meenakshi told him that he can make payment in Coimbatore Branch in Tamil Nadu as Coimbatore is near to Palakkad. The complainant went to Coimbatore but here also they refused to receive the amount as other state payments are not acceptable. After many telephone enquiries one suresh who is said to be a collection agent called the complainant and all his dues were paid to him on 12/10/2009 for which he issued a receipt and No objection certificate will be send to him by post but not received it. When the complainant was in need of many for the treatment of his father, he tried to sell the bike. But he could not sell the same as NOC was not received from the opposite party company. The complainant took 3 days leave from his job for the sole purpose of clearing the documents of his bike, there for he suffered loss of pay that is Rs. 1,500/-. All these hardships, mental agony and money loss caused to the complainant because of the deficiency in rendering service from the part of opposite parties.
So the complainant seeking an order directing the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs. 27,500/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of petition till it's realization and directing the opposite parties to issue No Objection Certificate to the complainant and cost of the proceedings.
Opposite parties entered appearance and filed version with the following contentions:
Opposite parties admit that the complainant has entered in to Loan Agreement No. 452033034 on 11/08/2006 and availed finance of Rs. 49,428/- (including financial charges of Rs. 11,428/- for 36 months) for the purchase of Bajaj Platina. IMI to be paid per month is Rs. 1,373/-. At the time of execution of the loan agreement the complainant has gone through and understood all the terms and conditions of the loan agreement. The company shall be entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 350/- as delayed payment interest per month and Rs. 150/- towards other collection charges. Part of the month shall be treated as a full month delay. Complainant is a permanent defaulter and as on date he was in arrears of Rs. 2,845/-.
Both parties filed their respective affidavits. Ext. A1 to A4 marked on the side of the complainant and Ext. B1 to B2 marked on the side of opposite party.
Matter was heard and gone through the documents produced.
Issues to be considered are:
1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party? If so,
2. what is the relief and cost?
The case of the complainant is that complainant entered into Hire purchase agreement with the Manager, Bajaj Auto Finance Limited, Palakkad Branch for the purchase of Bajaj Platina Motor Bike on 11/08/2006 as per the agreement No. 452033034. As per the terms of the agreement opposite party financed Rs. 38,000/- to the complainant and complainant agreed to repay the amount through 36 equal installments at the rate of Rs. 1,373/-. So the complainant issued 36 post dated cheques to the opposite party. Before the stipulation period of Hire Purchase agreement, the Palakkad branch is closed and 2nd opposite party is in charge with Palakkad branch's affairs. The period of agreement was elapsed on 20/08/2009. After the period of completion the petitioner contacted the respondent branch office at Thrissur, for clearing the documents, he was informed that there was a due of Rs. 6,091 as two cheques were dishonoured. When the complainant enquired the matter with the bank was understood that only one EMI cheque was dishonoured. Then the complainant went to the respondent office at Thrissur to pay all the dues. But the complainant was informed that they can't receive the amount as it is a matter concerned with Palakkad Branch. The complainant went to Thrissur office because the Palakkad branch office of the opposite party was closed without informing its customers. After many quiries and sending E-mails the complainant was informed that he can make payments in Coimbatore branch. But the Coimbatore office also refused to receive the payments as they cannot receive the other state payments in their office. Informing all these things the petitioner sent an E-mail to customer care. Then a person named Mr. Suresh (collection agent) called the complainant and all his dues were paid to him on 12/10/2009 and for which he issued a receipt (Ext. A1) and told that the No Objection Certificate will be send to the petitioner by post. But for 22 months the complainant has not received the NOC. In the affidavit complainant stated that on 16/08/2011 No Objection Certificate was received by him. At the stage of arguments the counsel for the complainant produced the NOC. The main prayer in the petition is directing the opposite parties to issue No Objection Certificate to the complainant. This issue is solved as NOC was received by the complainant.
In the version opposite party stated that complainant is in arrears of Rs. 2,845/-. If there is any dues company will not issue No Objection certificate to the complainant.
The Palakkad branch office of the opposite parties closed without giving information to its customers. After the completion of the agreement period the opposite parties did not informed the complainant about the dues. When the complainant contacted the opposite parties to clear the documents then only he came to know about the dues. The complainant was ready to pay the dues as stated by the opposite parties. But the complainant suffered much difficulties and financial loss to make this payment as Palakkad branch office was closed without giving information. Any how on 12/10/2009 the complainant cleared all his dues. After the payment of full amount the opposite parties made 22 months delay in issuing the No Objection Certificate. So that he could not sell his vehicle when he was in need of money. Even after issuing the No Objection Certificate the opposite parties say that there are some dues. In fact before filing version itself the opposite parties had issued NOC to the complainant.
So that it is very clear that there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.
In the result complaint allowed. Opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to pay an amount of Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 1,000/- as cost of the proceedings.
Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order, failing which the complainant is entitled for 9% interest per annum for the whole amount from the date of receipt of order till realization.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 31st day of December, 2011
Sd/-
Smt. Preetha.G.Nair
Member
Sd/-
Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K
Member
A P P E N D I X
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant
Ext. A1 - Receipt (original) bearing No. AF11867053 issued by the opposite party to complainant.
Ext. A2 – Account Statement (original) issued by the District Co-operative Bank, Palakkad to complainant.
Ext. A3 - R.C Book (original) of the complainant.
Ext. A4 - Statement (original) issued by the CAP Digisoft Solution Pvt Ltd. showing the leave taken by the complainant in accordance with the case.
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties
Ext. B1 – Hire Purchase Agreement (copy) between the complainant and opposite parties.
Ext. B2 – Statement of Account (copy) from opposite parties to complainant dated 18/11/2011.
Witness examined on the side of the complainant
Nil.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties
Nil.
Cost allowed
Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) allowed as cost of the proceedings.
