Date of Filing:  16.2.2016

                                                                                        Date of Order: 18.03.2019

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – I, HYDERABAD

P r e s e n t­

HON’BLE Sri P.Vijender, B.Sc. L.L.B.  PRESIDENT.

HON’BLE Smt. D.NIRMALA, B.Com., LLB., MEMBER

ON THIS THE  MONDAY  THE 18^th    DAY OF MARCH, 2019

C.C.No.119 /2016

Between

Mr.Srinivas Emani,

S/o. Sri E.Venkateswarulu,

Aged about 43 Years, Occ: Business,

R/o. P No.116,Venkataramana Colony,

Gokul  Plot, KPHB, Hyderabad – 500 072.                            ……Complainant

And

1.     The Manager, TVS Credit  Services Limited,

          IIIrd Floor, Kamala Towers, 10 SP Road,

          Begumpet, Secunderabad – 500 009.

2.     The Manager, TVS Credit Services Limited,

    Plot No.115, Vahini Nagar, Opp: Lane of Bata Showroom,

    Diamond Point, Sikh Village, Secunderabad – 500 009.

                                                                                                       ….Opposite Parties

Counsel for the complainants             :  M/s.A.Naveen Kumar

Counsel for the Opposite Party          :   Absent.                   

O R D E R

(By Sri. Sri P. Vijender, B.Sc., LL.B., President on behalf of the bench)

1)            This complaint  has been  preferred under Section 12 of Consumer Protection  Act,  1986  for   a direction to the opposite parties to receive   at balance 15 months EMIs and release  the vehicle  forthwith  and to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation to the complainant for causing mental agony.

2)  The complainant’s case in brief is that  he availed  finance of Rs.2,45,000/- from the opposite parties for the purchase of  Maruthi Swift car bearing  registration  No.AP10 AQ2132 and the hypothecation of  vehicle .  At the time of availing the loan the opposite parties have taken loan agreement,  TP receipt, ID proof, residential proof from the complainant.  The loan amount was repayable in 48 monthly equated installments of Rs.7,587/- each  commencing  from 7.1.2017.  He agreed to pay EMIs through ECS mode till discharge of the debit without fail.  After availing the loan opposite parties have collected 33 EMIs apart from the amount for the delayed  payment of instalments, cheque bouncing charges and penalty amount.

                           The complainant  never had an intention to skip   EMIs to the opposite parties and he is  ready   willing to pay the balance 15 installments.  While matter stood  thus he  gave the  car to his relatives  at Ongole for their personal use.  The agents of the opposite parties went to Ongole and seized the car and collected signature of his relatives on the letter of surrender dt. 22.9.2015 as if the same was voluntarily surrendered,  Soon after  learning the same  complainant went to the office of opposite parties and on   enquiry he was informed that  the vehicle was already sold and he was  not given reasons for the sale of it.  The seizer of the vehicle and sale of the same to 3^rd party without even an intimation to the complainant is illegal and unauthorized act on the part of the opposite parties and it is contrary to terms and conditions of financing.  Hence  complainant got issued a legal notice to all the opposite parties asking  them to receive balance 15 months  EMIs and release the vehicle or to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as damages  for  depriving him in   using the vehicle and for causing  mental agony.  But there was no reply from the opposite parties though they have received the said notice.  After receipt of the said legal notice the opposite parties sold the vehicle to the 3^rd party on 31.12.2015.  Hence the present complaint.

 3)                   Opposite party No.1 despite service of notice of complaint has not appeared.  Whereas the notice to opposite party NO.2 returned as left.  As per the cause title of the complainant opposite party No.1 and 2 are one and the same office but different branches situated in Secunderabad area itself.  Since opposite party No.1 received the notice it   has got knowledge of contents of the complaint. Though notice to opposite party No.2 returned as left it is deemed that service of   notice to opposite party No.1  is sufficient   for both the opposite parties.. 

4)               In the enquiry  stage  the complainant  filed his  evidence affidavit  reiterating  the  material averments  of complaint.  He also   got exhibited 6 documents

5)         Now  the point for consideration is   whether  the  complainant is entitled for reliefs prayed for ?

The Ex.A2 and A3 stated to be statement of account’s showing payment of 33 installments by the complainant.The hypothecation and loan agreements are not filed.Admittedly said documents will be in the custody of opposite parties being a financer.The allegation of the complainant is that no notice was issued to him before the seizure of the car and its re-sale to 3^rd party which are required to be exhibited. The opposite parties have not come forward to deny it in the present complaint.Because loan agreement and hypothecation agreements are not filed it is not known whether the opposite parties are entitled to re-possess the vehicle even without notice to the lonee for default committed in payment of installments.In the case of Ms.K.Habbibunnisa Vs. Shriram Transport Finance Company ltd., the Hon’bleA.P. stateConsumer Disputes Redressal Commission held that when hire purchase agreement wasnot filedto show the companyis entitledto re-possess the vehicle in default inpayment of installments.Where vehicle was forcibly seized and sold by financer it would be just and proper to award reasonable compensation.Since the opposite parties have not chosen to deny the complainant’s averments same is to be accepted.In the light of it the seizure of the vehicle without notice by the agents of the opposite party while the vehicle was in the hands of complainant’s relatives and its sale to 3rd parties amounts to unfair trade practice.Hence the complainant is entitled for repossession of the vehicle on payment of balance EMIs.Accordingly the point is answered in favour of the complainant.

9)       PointNo.3:- In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties:

           1)  To release the vehicle to the complainant on payment of 15 EMIs by the complainant.

          2)  The opposite parties are liable to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/-  as compensation  for repossession of the vehicle without notice to the complainant to the complainant.

3)      The opposite parties are further to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as costs of this complaint.

           Time for compliance is one month from the date of service of this order.

  MEMBER                                                                                            PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

                                                 WITNESS EXAMINED

                                                              NIL                                  

Exhibits  filed on behalf of the Complainant:

Ex.A1 -  Copy of certification of  registration

Ex.A2 – Copy of statement of account

Ex.A3 – Copy of repayment Schedule

Ex.A4 –  Letter of surrender of the asset  by the borrower

Ex.A5 – Copy of postal acknowledgement

Ex.A6 – Office copy of legal notice.

Exhibits  filed on behalf of the Opposite parties:

Nil

MEMBER                                                                                            PRESIDENT