DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM  PALAKKAD

Dated this the  20^th day of February 2016.

Present   : Smt.Shiny.P.R. President

               : Smt.Suma.K.P.  Member                               Date of filing: 19/12/2013

                                                      (C.C.No.215/2013)       

Abdul Salam,

S/o.Late Unnyappu,

Pallath House,

Kanjirapuzha Post - 678591                            -        Complainant

(through Power of Attorney Yousaf. A)

(By Adv.V.R.Prabhashini & Adv.K.Dhananjayan) 

Vs

1.Thulsi Finance Corporation,

No.12, Vainkunda Vadiyar Street,

Sowcarpet, Madras – 600 079

(By Adv.P.Padmaprakash)

2.The Manager

Grand Motors,

ISRA Towers, Nellipuzha,

Mannarkkad, Palakkad                                   -       Opposite parties

O R D E R

By Smt.Shiny.P.R.  President.

Brief facts of complaint.

The complainant purchased a vehicle bearing registration No.KL-50-6230 Bajaj autorikshaw from Mr. Rajesh who purchased vehicle from 2^nd opposite party. 2^nd opposite party arranged the financial assistance  with 1^st opposite party. Mr.Rajesh had  hypothecated vehicle with the 1^st opposite party and he made payments also. At the time of purchasing the vehicle there were remaining twenty four installments at the rate of  Three thousand and six hundred rupees per installment. The complainant agreed to pay the prescribed amount for each installment. The finance was maintained with the agent of the 1^st opposite party at Manjeri and thereby the registration certificate was transferred in the name of the complainant on 10/8/2013.

The complainant submitted that he  paid the entire installments as agreed and stipulated with the opposite party. The complainant paid the last installment in September 2011. Thereafter the complainant several times requested to return the registration  certificate and three blank cheques and blank signed stamp paper. Registration certificate  is necessary for renewal of the permit but the opposite party was not amenable. On the other hand the opposite party was made unnecessary demands for making payment of Rs.3000/- as penal interest and the same was also paid to the opposite party on 28/5/2012. The opposite party was not being return the registration certificate the complainant was constrained to pay a sum of Rs.2000/- as fine to the R.T.O at Mannarkkad.

 Then the complainant issued a registered  notice on 10/12/2012 and the same was received  by the opposite party. The opposite party did not return the original registration certificate and  other documents to the complainant. As such the complainant could not ply the vehicle on road or sale the vehicle. Thereby this complainant  was sustained financial loss of Rs.50,000/- and he has suffered mental agony and pain.   

Complainant prays for an order directing 1^st opposite party

1.to return the registration certificate in respect of vehicle number KL50-6230 and the blank signed cheques and stamp paper.

2.direct the opposite party to pay back Rs.5,000/-

3. to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony and torture

4.and  Rs.2000/- towards cost of the proceedings.

Complaint was admitted and issued notice to opposite parties. 1^st opposite party appeared before the forum. After receiving the notice 2^nd opposite party remained absent. Hence 2nd opposite party set as exparte.

1^st Opposite party filed version contending the following:   

The complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The transaction alleged to have been taken place in Manjery which is situated in Malappuram district. Hence this Hon’ble Forum is not having the jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.

This opposite party admitted that the complainant had approached them for getting financial assistance and after complying all legal formalities they offered financial assistance to the complainant. The complainant and the opposite party have entered into an agreement for this purpose. As per the agreement the complainant has to pay Rs.3600/- on or before day of every month. This complainant was highly irregular in making the payments as a reason of which the opposite party was constrained to charge penal interest for the defaulted installments as stipulated in the hire purchase agreement. As such as per the clause 10 of the above said agreement the complainant is liable to pay 36% interest per annum for the defaulted installments.

Moreover 1^st  opposite party contended that RC of the above said vehicle is in the possession of the complainant. After complying all legal formalities     RC was send to the complainant by the concerned RTO office.

While executing the hire purchase agreement the complainant has signed the filled hire purchase agreement and handed over cheque leaf drawn on the 1^st opposite party and stamp paper as per the legal conditions. Those documents can be returned to the complainant only after the complainant remitting the entire balance outstanding amounts. As per the books of accounts maintained by the 1^st opposite party the complainant has to pay a further amount of Rs.8,719/- towards the outstanding dues as on  3/1/2014.

Further  more the complainant has availed the financial assistance from the 1^st opposite party through the Agent in Manjeri. Hence he is necessary party to the proceedings. Hence the complaint is bad for non jointer of necessary parties.

Complainant and 1^st opposite party filed their respective chief affidavits. Exts.A1 to A6 are marked from the side of the complainant. Ext.B1 from the side of 1^st opposite party. In chief affidavit of opposite party it is mentioned that Ext.B2 is produced along with affidavit. But this document is not produced along with affidavit. Complainant filed IA 64/15 seeking permission to cross examine 1^st opposite party and that was allowed by the Forum. But 1^st opposite party not appeared before the forum for cross examination. Similarly complainant filed application for the cross production of hire purchase agreement and statement of accounts certified by a chartered accountant  attested by company secretary from the opposite party. This application was also allowed by the forum. They were not produced the above documents.

The following issues are considered

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

2.If so, what is the relief?

Issues 1 and 2

Complaint was heard. 1^st opposite party was absent at the time of hearing.

 We have perused the documents produced before the forum. Ext B1 shows that complainant had paid entire installments. But there are some variations in the date of payments. As per Ext.B1 last date of payment is       29-9-2011. 1^st Opposite party submitted that as per the agreement entered into between the complainant and 1^st opposite party they have the right to charge penal interest for the defaulted payments. Complainant submitted that he had paid Rs.3000/- on 28-5-2012 towards penal interest as per the demand of 1^st opposite party. In order to prove their contentions 1^st opposite party did not produce agreement before the forum, even though there was an order to produce the same before the forum.   Therefore the forum has taken adverse inference against 1^st opposite party and we came to the conclusion that  1^st Opposite party has no right to charge penal charges or interest from the complainant. In the above circumstances we are of the opinion that collecting penal charges without any authority from the customers amounts to deficiency in service and unfair service on the part of 1^st opposite party.

It is true that the complainant could not ply the vehicle or sale the vehicle without the original registration certificate. Opposite party contented that they had submitted the RC book for endorsement to the RTO Mannarkkad and after making endorsement concerned office sent RC to the complainant. For proving this contention opposite party did not adduce any evidence. In the above circumstances we are of the opinion that after receiving entire installments opposite party did not return the RC book,  blank cheques and stamp paper to the complainant which amounts to deficiency in service on their part. From the available documents we came to the conclusion that there is  no arrears due to the  opposite party by the complainant. Hence complainant has no liability to pay Rs.8,719/- to the opposite party.

Apart from that complainant submitted that he was constrained to pay Rs.2000/- as fine to the RTO Mannarkkad due to the non availability of  RC.    Ext.A6 proves that the complainant  could not pay road tax due to the non availability of the R C. Due to the act of the opposite party complainant could not ply the vehicle on road.

In these circumstances we are of the opinion that there are deficiency in service on the part of 1^st opposite party.  Therefore 1^st opposite party has the liability  to pay compensation to the complainant and to return the original RC  to the complainant. 

Complainant has not raised any specific allegation against 2^nd opposite party. Hence complaint against 2^nd opposite party is dismissed.

In the result complaint is partly allowed. We direct the 1^st opposite party

1. to return original RC, three blank cheques and blank stamp paper to the complainant.   
2. to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) as compensation for mental agony suffered and
3. to pay Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) as cost of proceedings.

If the opposite party could not return the RC to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt order, he  has to issue No Objection Certificate to the complainant and pay Rs.5,000/- in addition to the amount already awarded for meeting the expenses to get the duplicate RC from the RT office Mannarkkad.

Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of the order, failing which complainant shall entitled  to get 9% interest for the whole amount from the date of order, till realization.

Pronounced in the open court on this the 20^th  day of February 2016.

                                                                                           Sd/-

                      Shiny.P.R.

                      President   

                         Sd/-

                      Suma.K.P.

                      Member

Appendix

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant

Ext.A1 –  Payment received  chart issued by opposite party to Rajesh dated  

              14/10/2008

Ext.A2 series  - Receipts (18 Nos) dated 25/7/2009 to 29/9/2011 issued by

                        opposite party to the complainant

Ext.A3 -   Photocopy of DD dated 28/5/2012

Ext.A4   - Reply to RTI letter to the complainant dated 1/11/12  Information 

               issued by JRTO, Mannarkkad

Ext.A5  –  Letter dated 10/12/12 issued by the complainant to the opposite

               party with acknowledgement card

Ext.A6 –   Copy Intimation of non use of vehicle dated 8/10/13 which was

               submitted to RTO Mannarkkad

Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties

Ext.B1 –    Account statement issued by 1^st opposite party in the name of

                complainant  

Cost   

Rs.3,000/- allowed as cost of the proceedings.