IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA

Monday the 31^st day of July,2017

Filed on 06/09/2016

Present

1.    Smt. Elizabeth George, President       

2.    Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member)                    in

  C.C.No.290/2016

                                                              between

Complainant:-                                                   Opposite Parties:-

Sri.Gopalakrishnan.D                                          The Manager,

Shobha Nivas,                                                      Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd,

Pullikanakku PO,                                                 4^th Floor, Manjuran Estate Building

Kayamkulam-690 537                                          Edappally, Cochin, Ernakulam.

                                                                             (By Adv. G.Sunilkumar)

O R D E R

SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)

          The case of the complainant is as follows:-

Complainant had taken a loan of Rs.35,000/- from the opposite party for a period of 3 years.  As per terms and conditions, the loan was repayable at 36 EMIs.  Complainant closed the finance by remitting an amount of Rs.49,344/- including interest.  On 28/8/16 when the complainant approached another bank for an agricultural loan he came to know that there is a liability of Rs. 35,000/- in his account of the opposite party and his loan application was rejected and that caused much mental agony to the complainant.  Hence the complaint is filed.

          2. Version of the opposite party is as follows:

The subject loan was expired on 1-4-08 and at the time of expiry of the loan the complainant was in default of Rs. 34,820/-.  Unless and until the complainant remits total loan amount as per the agreed terms and condition of the loan agreement the opposite party will not be in a position to issue No Objection Certificate to the complainant.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

3.Complainant filed proof affidavit and documents produced were marked as Ext.A1 to A3 series.  No oral evidence adduced from the part of the opposite party but they have filed 2 documents along with version.

4.Points for considerations are:

          1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?

          2) If so the reliefs and costs?

5. It is an admitted fact that the complainant had taken a loan of Rs.35,000/- from the opposite party for a period of 3 years.  It is also an admitted fact that the loan period starts from 20-3-2005.  According to the complainant he had closed the loan amount by remitting 36 installments.  In order to prove that complainant produced the pass book issued by the District Co-Operative Bank Alappuzha which marked as Ext.A2 and receipts issued by the opposite party which marked as Ext.A3 series.  On verifying the Ext.A2 and A3 series we came to see that the complainant had remitted 36 installments.  On 28/7/08 complainant had remitted 4 installments together and in that receipt it is noted by the opposite party that foreclosing.  The opposite party filed version stating that the complainant committed default in remitting the EMI and due to the non remittance of the monthly installments on time he was in default of Rs.34,820/-.  In order to substantiate this contention no sufficient evidence adduced from the part of the opposite party.  The account statement produced by the opposite party shows that on 3/4/2008 cheque No.343758 received towards due.   At the same time the front page of the statement shows that net receivable amount is Rs.34,820/-.  How the opposite party calculated the net receivable amount is not clear from the account statement. The account statement has no continuity also. More over Ext.A3(a) shows that foreclosing is noted by the opposite party.  So the complainant was under the belief that the loan amount is closed and there is no balance amount in the loan account with the opposite party.  Apart from that the opposite party has not issued any notice against the complainant claiming any amount towards arrears.

          From the above discussion we are of opinion that complainant has closed the loan amount and opposite party is not entitled to claim any amount from the complainant towards arrears.

          In the result complaint is allowed as follows:

1. Opposite party is directed to provide the registration paper of the bike owned by the complainant.
2. Opposite party is further directed to issue NOC to the complainant and also remove the name of the complainant from CIBIL.

Since the primary relief is allowed no further amount as to cost and compensation.

The Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.

            Dictated to the Confidential Assistance transcribed by him corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 31^st  day of July, 2017.

                                                                   Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)

                                                                   Sd/- Smt. Jasmine. D.  (Member)          

Appendix:-

Evidence of the complainant:-

Ext.A1-Post office Savings Pass book

Ext.A2-Saving Bank Account pass book

Ext.A3-Series of receipts issued by Bajaj Finance

//True Copy//

By Order

Senior Superintendent

To

            Complainant/Opposite party/S.F

Typed by:S/

Comparedby: