By. Sri. A. S. Subhagan, Member:-

This is a consumer complaint filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.

2.  Facts of the case:-  The Complainant had availed a vehicle loan of Rs.2,15,000/- in the year 2014 from the Opposite Party No.1.  He states that the entire amount of loan was remitted in the year 2019 but inspite of repeated requests the Opposite Party did not issue Certificate of Clearance.  As a consequence, on 17.12.2021, the Complainant forwarded an application to Opposite Party No.1 by post for getting documents and clearance Certificate.  The Complainant produced the status report document taken from the site of the Opposite Party No.1 Company.  The Opposite Party No.1 had instructed the Complainant to bring this status statement at the time of clearance.  But, as the vehicle has been now transferred to another, the Complainant requested to get documents from the Opposite Party No.1.  This has caused huge loss to the Complainant.  Hence the Complainant has approached the Commission with prayers to get direction to the Opposite Party No.1 officers to deliver the documents and the cheque leaves to the Complainant.  It is also prayed to direct the Opposite Party No.2 to remove the endorsement of finance of the Opposite Party if the Opposite Party does not issue the documents.

            3.  Notice was issued to the Opposite Parties.  Opposite Party No.1 appeared and filed version but as Opposite Party No.2 did not appear they were set ex-parte.

            4. The contentions of the Opposite Party No.1 in version, in brief are as follows:-

            The vehicle loan is admitted by the Opposite Party No.1.  The said loan is containing 58 installments of Rs.5,340/- each.  Most of the allegations of the Complainant are denied by the Opposite Party.  According to Opposite Party No.1, the Complainant had remitted only 9 monthly installments as agreed upon by him in the contract entered into with the Opposite Party No.1 and an amount of Rs.2,60,650/- towards principal, Rs.2,22,752/- towards additional interest and Rs.2,500/- towards cheque bouncing charges and altogether an amount of Rs.4,85,902/- is due from the Complainant to the Opposite Party No.1.  The Complainant has not so far taken any steps to discharge the debt due to the Opposite Party No.1.  The Complainant was a regular defaulter of the loan and 49 monthly installments are still pending in the said loan.  The allegation of the Complainant that the sale of vehicle which is the subject matter of the loan in question and under hypothecation of the Opposite Party No.1, stated in the complaint is unlawful. The Complainant is not entitled to sell the vehicle which is already under hypothecation of the Opposite Party No.1 and the same is a criminal offence. The Opposite Party No.1 is not liable to hand over the clearance certificate etc to the Complainant till the closure of the loan.  The Opposite Party No.1 has not obtained any cheque leaves etc from the Complainant at any point of time.   And hence the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for in the complaint and the Opposite Party has prayed to dismiss the complaint with compensatory cost.

            5.  Chief affidavit was filed by the Complainant and Exts.A1 series (A1(a) to A1(f)) and Ext.A2 to A4 were marked from his side. He was examined as PW1 on 05.04.2023.  Chief affidavit was also filed by Opposite Party No.1, Ext.B1 and B2 were marked and he was examined as OPW1.

            6.  considering the complaint, version, affidavits filed, documents marked and the oral evidences adduced by both PW1 and OPW1, Commission raised the following points for consideration:-

1. Whether there has been unfair trade practice or deficiency in service from the part of the Opposite Parties?
2. If so, whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for?

            7. For the purpose of clarity and brevity both the points are considered together. 

            8.  Point No.1 & 2:-  The Complainant says that he had availed a vehicle loan of Rs.2,15,000/- in the year 2014 from the Opposite Party No.1.  He also states that he had remitted the entire loan amount in 2019 but inspite of repeated requests the Opposite Party did not issue Clearance Certificate for removal of the endorsement of hypothecation from the RC book.  But the Opposite Party as did not issue the Certificates, sent a letter dated 17.12.2021 requesting the required certificates and the cheque leafs etc, which is marked as Ext.A2.  The Opposite Party No.1 is not seen responded to Ext.A2 document.  The Complainant also produced and marked Ext.A1(a) to A1(f) which have been downloaded and taken copies from the website of the Opposite Party No.1.  The Opposite Party No.1 in oral evidence as deposed that Ext.A1, A2, A1(f) documents are not taken from the website of Opposite Party No.1.  But they have not objected marking of these documents at the time of evidence.  Moreover the details shown in the documents especially the name of the Complainant ie Loanee, the amount of loan availed, the date of loan and the closing of loan etc perfectly match with the statements of the Complainant.  The loan amount has also admitted by the Opposite Party No.1.  The last date of the tenure of loan was ended on 30.09.2019.  Which is evident from Ext.A1 series of documents.  The Opposite Party No.1 in re-examination has deposed that Ext.A1 document are not related to their company and they are fabricated documents.  They have also deposed that they intend to take legal steps against the Complainant.  The Opposite Party No.1 in version states that a huge amount is pending in the vehicle loan account of the Complainant but no legal action is seen to be taken by the Opposite Party No.1 against the Complainant till the date of filing the complaint.  If the first Opposite Party’s contentions are true, a financial institution like the Opposite Party No.1 would take legal actions against the Complainant for the recovery of these huge arrears of loan from the Complainant. But, no legal action is taken by them to recover the arrears from the Complainant.  Therefore, the statement of the Opposite Party No.1 that huge amounts are pending in the loan account of the Complainant cannot be believed.  Moreover, as the A1 series of documents produced and marked by the Complainant contains the details of the loan availed by the Complainant from the Opposite Party No.1.  In that documents it has been seen stated that the vehicle loan has closed.  Therefore, Commission is of the view that the Opposite Party No.1 is illegally withholding the documents of the Complainant without issuing the clearance Certificates for endorsement in the RC book of the Complainant.  This act of the Opposite Party No.1 is nothing but unfair trade practice/deficiency in service for which the Opposite Party No.1 is liable.

In the result, the complaint is allowed and the Opposite Party No.1 is directed

1. To return all the documents under their custody in respect of the vehicle loan of the Complainant, to the Complainant
2. To issue Clearance Certificate of loan to the Complainant.
3. To pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) as cost of this complaint to the Complainant.
4. If the Opposite Party No.1 is does not issue the loan clearance Certificate in respect of the vehicle to the Complainant, within one month from the date of this Order, the Opposite Party No.2 is directed to accept an application from the Complainant and to make necessary endorsements in the RC for the removal of loan details of the vehicle.

The above order shall be obeyed by the Opposite Party No.1 within one month from the date of receipt of this Order and the Opposite Party No.2 to do as directed within two months from the date of this Order.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 12^th day of August 2024.

Date of Filing:-14.02.2022.

PRESIDENT   :  Sd/-

MEMBER       : Sd/-

MEMBER       : Sd/-

APPENDIX

Witness for the Complainant:-

PW1.              Baiju. P. M.                                      Sales.

Witness for the Opposite Parties:-

OPW1.          Sanoop. P.                                        Deputy Legal Manager.

Exhibits for the Complainant:-

A1(a).                        Printout of Loan detail from the Company Website (Page 1).

A1(b).                        Printout of Loan detail from the Company Website (Page 2).

A1(c).             Printout of Loan detail from the Company Website (Page 3).

A1(d).                        Printout of Loan detail from the Company Website (Page 4).

A1(e).                        Printout of Loan detail from the Company Website (Page 5).

A1(f).             Printout of Loan detail from the Company Website (Page 6).

A2.                  Copy of Letter.                                                        Dt:17.12.2021.

A3.                  Postal Receipt.

A4.                  Acknowledgment Card.

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:-

B1.                  Copy of Power of Attorney.                                Dt:11.05.2023.

B2.                  Copy of Statement of Account. 

PRESIDENT   :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

/True Copy/

Sd/-

                                                                                             ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

                                                                                                  CDRC, WAYANAD.

Kv/-