BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : AT HYDERABAD.



FA No.440/2009 against CC.No.476/2007 District Consumer Forum-II,Visakhapatnam.



Between:

Akkanapragada Venkata Chenna Narasimha Nageswara Rao,

S/o.A.V.R.Seshagiri Rao (late)

Hindu, Aged 48 years,

R/o.Flat No.404. V Floor, Hemalatha Towers, Opp.Dist Court,

Prakasaraopeta,

Visakhaptnam.

…Appellant/Complainant.

And

Bajaj Finance, Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd.

Coastal Hardware, 1st Floor,

Coastal Hardware Building,

Sankaramatham Road, Visakhapatnam – 3.

…Respondent/Opp.Party.



Counsel for the Appellants : M/s.Y.K.M.Lakshmi and V.Gourisankara Rao.

Counsel for the Respondent : Admn.stage.





QUORUM: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, HON’BLE PRESIDENT,

AND

SMT.M.SHREESHA, HON’BLE LADY MEMBER,



WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY,

TWO THOUSAND NINE.



Oral Order (Per Smt.M.Shreesha, Hon’ble Lady Member)

*******

1. Aggrieved by the order in CC.No.476/2007 on the file of District Consumer Forum-II, Visakhapatnam, the complainant preferred this appeal.

2. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that he availed loan from the opposite party for purchasing an Air Conditioner of 1.5 ton capacity and issued post dated cheques, each @ Rs.2200/-, to the opposite party. The complainant submits that when a cheque was dishonoured, one B.V.P.Raju, a representative of the opposite party, has approached him and collected an amount of Rs.2,200/- in cash, vide receipt No.0408040096. It is the contention of the complainant that the opposite party instead of returning the dishonoured cheque had once again presented it and got it encashed on 13.03.2007. Complainant noticed this fact on 16.07.2007 and then requested for refund of the amount. As there was no response from the opposite party, complainant got issued a legal notice and then filed complaint seeking directions to the opposite party to refund Rs.2,200/- with interest at 12% per annum besides damages and costs.

3. Opposite party filed its counter. It admitted the payment of seven instalments. However, with regard to dishonoured cheque, which was issued for eighth instalment, it had stated that in the usual course of business it presented a bunch of cheques for encashment and the cheque in question was mixed up in that bunch and thereby it was encashed and that it was purely a bonafide mistake, but not an intentional mistake and this fact was also intimated to the complainant requesting him to receive the amount, but the complainant bluntly refused to receive the amount stating that if it would not shell down a sum of Rs.6000/-, he would file a complaint. Opposite party submits that it was ready and willing to pay the amount. Since the complainant refused to received the amount, it has deposited the amount before the District Forum.

4. District Forum based on the pleadings put forth by both parties and the documentary evidence i.e. Exs.A.1 to A.4 allowed the complaint directing the opposite party to pay interest at 12% on the amount of Rs.2,200/- for the period from 13.03.2007 to 03.10.2007, besides compensation of Rs.750/-.

5. Being dissatisfied with the order, complainant preferred this appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the District Forum did not award compensation of Rs.10,000/- and costs. It did not consider the fact that the period of cheque that was deposited by the opposite party had already expired and it ought to have ordered the opposite party to pay Rs.2,200/- along with interest.

6. The brief point that falls for consideration in the instant case is whether the complainant is entitled to compensation of Rs.10,000/- and costs?

7. We observe that the claim of the complainant is for refund of Rs.2,200/- with interest at 12% per annum from 21.02.2007, which has already been awarded by the District Forum. The contention of the appellant/complainant that the opposite party was negligent in refunding the amount to him, for which he suffered mental agony and deserves Rs.10,000/-, is unsustainable in the absence of any documentary evidence with respect to loss incurred by him by the act of the opposite party in not refunding Rs.2,200/-. The District Forum has defined the act of the opposite party as ‘deficiency in service’ and awarded refund of Rs.2,200/- with interest at 12% per annum for the period from 13.03.2007 to 03.10.2007, which we find meets the ends of justice. The compensation that was awarded at Rs.750/- was reasonable, in the sense that the company has encashed the cheque which was once dishonoured. The fact remains that the appellant/complainant ought not to have issued a cheque without sufficient funds. May be later he paid the amount, but the fact remains that the cheque that was issued was dishonoured. Obviously finding fault that the company had encashed the cheque by presenting the same, District Forum opined that some compensation should be mulcted on the company and accordingly an amount of Rs.750/- was awarded, which we feel reasonable and modest. We do not see any ground to interfere with the order of the District Forum.

8. Therefore, the appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.



PRESIDENT



LADY MEMBER

Dt:6.5.2009.

Mr. M. Sivagurunathan,

S/o. G. Murugan,

23, Indira Nagar,

Bye-Pass Road,

Old Sungam, Coimbatore – 45. --- Complainant

Vs.

1. M/s. Rydon Auto Pvt. Ltd.,

Rep. by its Branch Manager,

Kalaikathir Building,

671, Avinashi Road,

Coimbatore – 641 037.

2. M/s. Bajaj Auto Finance,

Rep. by its Branch Manager,

No. 68, R.S. Puram,

Coimbatore – 641 002. -- Opposite Parties



This case coming on for final hearing before us today in the presence of Mr. S.Sivashankar and Mrs. P.Shanmugamalar, Advocates for complainant and the opposite parties remained absent and set exparte and upon perusing the case records and hearing the arguments and the case having stood over to this day for consideration, this Forum passed the following:

ORDER

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking direction against the opposite parties to return the original R.C. Book of the vehicle TN 38 AS 9934 or to take back the vehicle and refund the total cost of the Rs.63,325/-, to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant towards compensation for mental agony, hardship and sufferings and to pay cost of Rs.10,000/-

The averments in the complaint are as follows:

1. The 1st opposite party is a dealer for Bajaj Vehicles and the 2nd opposite party is a financier. The complainant approached the 1st opposite party to purchase a motor cycle Bajaj Pulsar 150 and wanted some financial assistance. The 1st opposite party readily agreed to arrange for the same and introduced to the 2nd opposite party. The 2nd opposite party also readily agreed to provide the required finance under hire purchase agreement.

2. After execution of necessary papers and payment of the initial amount, the opposite parties delivered the vehicle to the complainant by invoice No.2294 dt.18.3.08.The vehicle was registered and the registration No.of the vehicle was TN 38 AS 9934. The hire purchase instalments was for a period of 12 months and the loan amount was Rs.25,000 and monthly instalment of Rs.2500. After clearing the entire instalments, the complainant approached the opposite parties several times to get back the original RC book, H.P.termination papers and No objection papers but there has been no proper reply from the opposite parties.

3. The complainant had issued a legal notice to both the opposite parties on 21.5.09. The notice sent to 1st opposite party had been returned unserved as left. The 2nd opposite party had received the notice on 22.5.09 but there was no reply. The attitude and act of the opposite parties has resulted in hardship, monetary loss, physical strain and mental agony to the complainant. Hence this complaint.

4. The complainant and opposite parties have filed Proof Affidavit along with documents Ex.A1 to A8 was marked and the opposite parties remained absent and set exparte.

The point for consideration is

Whether the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service? If so to what relief the complainant is entitled to?

ISSUE 1

5. The case of the Complainant is that even after clearing the entire hire purchase instalment dues, the opposite parties is not returning the original RC book, H.P.termination papers and No objection papers to the complainant. Ex.A1 is the invoice, A2 is the copy of RC book and Ex.A3 is the insurance policy and A4 is the legal notice. The complainant has proved that the vehicle was purchased in his name. viz. Sivagurunathan and the entire hire purchase instalments has been paid in full. For this Xerox copy of Savings Book containing 3 passbooks is marked as Ex.A7. The opposite parties who are holding the documents ought to have delivered it on termination of the hire purchase agreement but failed to do so. Hence the act of the opposite parties is nothing but an unfair trade practice. The complainant has proved his case and the complainant is entitled to get necessary relief.

6. In the result, we direct the opposite parties to return the RC book, H.P.termination papers and no objection papers bearing vehicle No.TN 38 AS 9944 to the complainant and to pay Rs.15,000 as compensation for mental agony and to pay cost of Rs.1000 to the complainant within one month from the date of this order failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute this order u/s.25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

The finance company not returning Nco even after loan completed 10 months back. Bajaj finance closed its branch after declaring that it would give the Nco to more than 300 customers in Pollachi.

proposal no:421/100240
product financed:platina(alloy wh
amount financed:34985
FIRST DUE DATE:15-JUN-07
LAST DUE DATE:15-APRIL-10
EMI AMOUNT:1278.
I,SUNDARESWARI MURALIKUMAR HAS NOT YET RECIEVED MY 'NOC'.I HAVE CLEARED MY PAYMENTS COMPLETELY.I NEED MY NOC IMMEDIATELY.SEND ME FURTHER DETAILS ABOUT THIS ENQUIRY TO MY EMAIL ADDRESS: muraligarments@yahoo.in.
take your actions as soon as possible

Dear

I am in need of NOC for my bike Bajaj Pulsar. The financed amount has been completed almost 2.5yrs back.
Still not received my NOC.
Branch is Gurgaon Haryana. The branch has shifted their office to a new location and the contact number on the website is not correct.
My file number is 1959. Year of Finance is 2006 and financed for 2years.
Pls contact me on er.nikhilb@gmail.com or 07799600083


Thanks & Regards
Nikhil Bhan

Dear Sir,
I am P.T.Saravanakumar and i got loan for againts TV which i was bought from Vaidyananth Associate,Pollachi on June 2005 and i have paid all installment properly and i have bank account details of cheque clearance with bounce and no cheque bouces or i all cheques were cleared. I am working as Professor in Reputed Institution. But somebody i called after 5 years( two days before 29-03-2011) and telling you are not paid and your cheques were bounced and you have to pay 20,000 amount and threadening like anything my parents and i have his moble number if you request i will give and i am regular customer of Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd for the past 6 years.

FIRST DUE DATE:25/08/2005
LAST DUE DATE:20/03/2006
EMI AMOUNT:1209

I WAS YET RECIEVED MY 'NOC'.I HAVE CLEARED MY PAYMENTS COMPLETELY AND MY MAIL ID:ptscfd@gmail.com, shrisigma@gmail.com


with thanks and regards,

P.T.Saravanakumar
Pollachi
Mobile: 9488383900 & 9865348111

Sir,
i Vivek kuamr Pandey has taken loan of Rs 250000/= from ur varanasi Ramkatora dealer and till date havnt recievedc Noc As my loan tenure was end About a yea ago , So plz kindly consider that and doo the needful .

My Detail Are Follwoing ........
VIVEK KUAMR PANDEY
s/O LATE VINAY KANT PANDEY
B-20/47, KAILASH BHAWAN BHELUPURA .
VARANASI
LOAN AMOUNT -250000/- PULSAR 180.CC
eMI AMOUNT ----1208/=
REGISTRATION NO -UP65-AM4400
MOBILE NO -9919100865