DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 6th day of January, 2023
Present: Sri.Vinay Menon V., President
: Smt.Vidya A., Member
: Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member Date of Filing: 14/07/2021
CC/102/2021
Abdul Vasih,
S/o Ibrahim,
Karuvaankuzhiyil House,
Naduvattam,P. O.
Palakkad -679308 - Complainant
(By Adv.P. Schindas&Adv. Muhammadali Manekkathodi)
Vs
1. Officer in Charge
M/s SML Finance Ltd.
Regd. Office, Bethany Complex,
Thrissur Road, Kunnamkulam - 680 503
2. M/s SML Finance Ltd.,
Rgd. Office, Bethany Complex,
Thrissur Road, Kunnamkulam - 680 503
(By Adv. K. A. Kailas for OP 1&2) - Opposite parties
O R D E R
By Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member
1. The complainant purchased a Two Wheeler from M/s. Adithya Auto Sales, Palakkad under Hire Purchase Agreement with the opposite party agreeing to repay Rs. 2300/- per month. The complainant has already repaid 27 installments amounting to Rs. 62100/-. He met with an accident in November, 2019, after which there was some delay in making payments. According to him, he had requested the opposite party to bear with the short delays and they agreed to this.
On 12/03/2020 night, the complainant found his motor cycle missing from his residence which was duly reported to Koppam Police Station. After a few days the guarantor to the HP agreement received a lawyer notice issued on behalf of the opposite party from the contents of which, he realized that the vehicle had been seized by the opposite party. When contacted, the opposite party agreed to give back the vehicle if the 3 overdue installments are paid. When he went to the office of the opposite party for clearing the same, they insisted to make payment of Rs. 18900/- towards the overdue installments, penal interest etc. After collecting the payment, the opposite party issued No Objection letter addressed to the RTO, Pattambi for cancelling the Hire Purchase endorsement and asked the complainant to collect the seized vehicle from the service centre of Hero after 2 days. Inspite of repeated follow up, the vehicle was not handed over to the complainant. In between the complainant received the RC of the vehicle from RTO duly cancelling the HP endorsement.
In June 2020 the complainant came to know that the vehicle has already been sold in auction by the opposite party. Though he filed complaints with Kunnamkulam and Kaipamangalam police stations, no action was taken in the matter. Hence the complaint.
2. Notices were issued to the opposite parties. They entered appearance and filed their versions. Their contention is that the complainant failed to make the repayment as per the HP agreement and hence as per the advice of opposite party he surrendered the vehicle on 12/03/2020 duly executing a surrender letter. On 28/05/2020 the vehicle was sold in auction and the auction purchaser submitted necessary papers to RTO for getting the HP released and ownership changed to him. By mistake, RTO authorities sent the RC to the complainant after cancelling the HP endorsement without noticing that the request for change of ownership is pending. That is how the complainant got the RC with him and he is taking advantage of this situation. Actually, the last 3 installments and penal interest etc. were recovered by the sale of the vehicle and not remitted by the party as claimed. Further they have not issued any No Objection letter to the complainant.
3. Eventhough 5 issues were framed for consideration and filing of proof affidavit ordered the complainant as well as the opposite parties did not file proof affidavit or marked any documents as evidence. The complainant has been continuously absent during the proceedings of the case. Hence the case was taken for orders on merits.
4. In the absence of pleadings being proved by evidence, we are unable to reach a logical conclusion. With the available materials, we find that there are no merits in the case of the complainant.
Complaint is therefore dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 6th day of January, 2023.
Sd/-
Vinay Menon V
President
Sd/-
Vidya A
Member
Sd/-
Krishnankutty N.K.
Member
Appendix
Documents marked from the side of the Complainant: Nil
Documents marked from the side of opposite party: Nil
Witness examined –Nil
Cost – Nil
NB: Parties are directed to take back all extra set of documents submitted in the proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5) of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 failing which they be weeded out.
