By Sri. Ananthakrishnan. P. S, President:
This is a complaint filed under the Provisions of Consumer Protection Act.
2. The Complainant’s case in brief is as follows:-
The Complainant is the RC owner of the vehicle bearing registration No. KL 12 L 1476 Yamaha Fascino Motorcycle. The Complainant belongs to Scheduled Caste. He purchased the said vehicle on 27.04.2017 by availing the grant offered by the State Government to the members of Scheduled Caste for purchasing two wheelers and by availing loan from first Opposite Party. The total price of the vehicle was Rs.62500/-. The grant given by the government is Rs.15,000/- and thus, the Complainant availed a loan of Rs.47,500/- from the first Opposite Party. The first Opposite Party has also obtained an amount of Rs.5,000/- as processing fee. The first Opposite Party obtained 10 blank signed cheques from the Complainant for the assurance of the repayment. The Complainant was directed to remit monthly instalments of Rs.2,653/- for 30 months from 05.06.2017 including the interest till this period. Even though, the first Opposite Party has not given the chart of the loan without assailing any reason, the Complainant has paid a total amount of Rs.73,612/- through bank and directly to the first Opposite Party. Even then, the first Opposite Party and their men started threatening and pressurising the Complainant to pay an amount of Rs.47,500/- and only then they will issue loan clearance certificate. They have also threatened the Complainant that if the Complainant is not paying this amount, they will seize the vehicle and sell it in public auction. Therefore, the Complainant is not in a position to ply the vehicle even though, he has paid the entire loan amount. The men of first Opposite Party are also abusing, humiliating and insulting the Complainant and his family members by calling their caste name for which a police complaint was given by the aged mother of the Complainant. The first Opposite Party thus committed deficiency in service by not issuing the chart to know the rate of amount to be paid and period of instalments. They have also not given clearance certificate even though the Complainant paid the entire amount. Due to the acts of the Opposite Party, the Complainant underwent physical and mental troubles. The Complainant also apprehends that the first Opposite Party will seize the vehicle. Hence this complaint against the first Opposite Party not to size the vehicle forcefully, to get Rs.50,000/- for the deficiency of their service, to get back the blank signed cheque books, to issue loan clearance certificate and to pay the cost. He has filed this complaint against second Opposite Party also to remove the loan endorsement from the RC book, if, the first Opposite Party fails to give the clearance certificate.
3. First Opposite Party filed version which in short is as follows: They admitted that the Complainant availed a loan of Rs.47,500/- and purchased Yamaha Fascino Motorcylce as alleged by him. The first instalment was due and payable on 05.06.2017 and the Complainant has to pay the subsequent instalments before every 5th of the succeeding months. Then the last payment should be on 05.11.2019. Apart from the instalment amount, Complainant agreed to pay interest @ 3% for the delayed payment, default charge at the rate of Rs.550/- payable on a monthly basis compounded on a monthly rest, insurance premium and collection charges etc incurred. Since there is an arbitration clause in the agreement, this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain this matter. The Complainant had continuously defaulted the payment and not ready to repay the EMI in time. Though, there were repeated requests by notice, the remittance of instalments by the Complainant are out of time and therefore the Complainant liable to make penal interest on defaulted instalments. They also denied that the Complainant had paid Rs.73,612/- in the office of the first Opposite Party. Thus, the Complainant is bound to pay the balance instalments. Therefore, he is not entitled to get any relief sought in this compliant. Hence this complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. Second Opposite Party filed version which in short is as follows: They have no knowledge about the dispute if any between Complainant and first Opposite Party related to the payment of loan transaction. The Complainant has not submitted any application to cancel the Hypothecation in the Registration Certificate. If there is a valid request from the parties, they are ready to terminate the hypothecation.
5. On the above contentions, the points raised for consideration are:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of first
Opposite Party?.
2. Whether the Second Opposite Party is bound to cancel the
Hypothecation endorsement in the RC book of Complainant?.
3. Reliefs and Costs.
6. The evidence in this case consists of oral testimony of PW1, Ext.A1, A2 series and Ext.B1 to B3. Both sides heard.
7. Point No.1:- Admittedly the Complainant is the RC owner of KL 12 L 1476 Yamaha Fascino Motorcycle. Ext.A1 is the copy of the first page of RC book. It is also an admitted fact that the total price of the said vehicle was Rs.62,500/- and the Complainant purchased the vehicle by using Rs.15,000/- which was given by the state government to the Complainant as a member of Scheduled Caste to purchase two wheeler and Rs.47,500/- which was financed by the first Opposite Party. It is evident that the Complainant is bound to pay the said loan amount by 30 instalments of Rs.2,653/- per month from 05.06.2017. Though, the Complainant has a grievance that the fist Opposite Party has not given the payment chart, he had paid Rs.73,612/- which according to him is the entire loan amount and so, he is entitle to get the clearance certificate from the first Opposite Party. Ext.A2 series are the receipts of the said payments. Though, the first Opposite Party has not admitted 4 of them, they admitted the remaining payment. Anyhow, it is evident that the Complainant has to pay Rs.79,500/- including the interest till the last instalment. Ext.B1 is the document pertaining to the loan transaction. Ext.B1 would go to show the amount which was financed to the Complainant as well as the rate of instalment per month and total instalments. As per Ext.B1, the Complainant has to start the payment of first instalment on 05.06.2017 and he shall pay the last on 05.11.2019. So, there are 30 instalments. Ext.B3 is the hire purchase agreement. As per Ext.B3, the Complainant shall pay Rs.79,590/- towards the loan amount including the interest. So, even if, we accept that the Complainant had paid Rs.73,612/-, it is evident that still there is balance. Most of Ext.A2 series show that the Complainant had not paid the instalments in proper time as agreed. PW1 is the Complainant. He has also admitted that he has not paid the instalments in time. He has also admitted that if there is default, he is liable to pay penal interest. Ext.A2 series would go to show that he had given penal interest for some payments. Therefore, the evidence in this case would go to show that the Complainant failed to pay the entire loan amount as agreed. So, no doubt, he is not entitled to get the Clearance Certificate. So there is no deficiency in service on the first Opposite Party. Therefore the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief from the first Opposite Party. Hence point No.1 is answered against the Complainant.
8. Point No.2:- The contention of the second Opposite Party is that if there is a valid request from anybody, they have no objection to remove the hypothecation endorsement from the RC of the Complainant. As we already stated, it is evident that still there is balance to be paid by the Complainant towards loan transaction. So, no doubt, the first Opposite Party is not bound to give clearance certificate to get the endorsement removed. So there is no deficiency of service on the part of second Opposite Party also. Thus, point No.2 is answered accordingly.
9. Point No.2: Since Point No.1 and 2 are found against the Complainant, he is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed, but without costs.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 18th day of October 2022.
Date of Filing:-28.12.2020.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:-
PW1. Sudheer. Coolie.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:-
Nil.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Copy of Certificate of Registration.
A2(a). Counter foil Dt:05.06.2017.
A2(b). Repayment Temporary Receipt. Dt:13.07.2017.
A2(c). Repayment Temporary Receipt. Dt:28.09.2017.
A2(d). Repayment Temporary Receipt. Dt:05.10.2017.
A2(e). Counter foil Dt:06.11.2017.
A2(f). Repayment Temporary Receipt. Dt:05.12.2017.
A2(g). Repayment Temporary Receipt. Dt:27.02.2018.
A2(h). Repayment Temporary Receipt. Dt:06.01.2018.
A2(i). Repayment Temporary Receipt. Dt:30.07.2018.
A2(j). Repayment Temporary Receipt. Dt:28.09.2018.
A2(k). Repayment Temporary Receipt. Dt:09.02.2019.
A2(l). Repayment Temporary Receipt. Dt:03.09.2019.
A2(m). Counter foil Dt:06.10.2019.
A2(n). Counter foil Dt:06.11.2019.
A2(o). Acknowledgment of Payment. Dt:11.12.2020.
Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:-
B1. Copy of Letter mentioning Loan Details.
B2. Copy of Postal Receipts & Acknowledgment Cards.
B3. Copy of Hire Purchase Agreement. Dt:02.05.2017.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
CDRC, WAYANAD.
