THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOZHIKODE.
C.C.13/2010
Dated this the 15th day of December, 2014.
( Present: Sri. G. Yadunadhan, B.A., LLB. : President)
Smt.Beena Joseph, M.A : Member
ORDER
By G.Yadunadhan, President:
The case of the complainant is that complainant was the R.C.holder of Motor Car Hyundai Sanrtro XL bearing registration No.KL-11-AA-3331, and bearing Engine No.G4HG7M219879 and Chassis No.MALAA51HR7M176938. At the time of purchase of the car the complainant had hypothecated the car with the second opposite party. The second opposite party had advanced an amount of Rs.2,85,000/- to the complainant for the purchase of the Motor Car and the complainant was requested to repay an amount of Rs.9665/- per month to the opposite party from10.10.2007 till 10.09.2010 in 36 installments. Towards the loan amount of Rs.2,85,000/- complainant was requested to pay an amount of Rs.9665/- in 36 installments. Thus the complainant was liable to pay an amount of Rs.3,47,940/- towards capital and interest to close the loan account. Towards this complainant had paid an amount of Rs.2,23,335/- .So the complainant is liable to pay an amount of Rs.1,24,605/- towards Capital and interest to close the loan account. Till May 2009 the opposite parties have charged the complainant an amount of Rs.4577/- towards over due charges and an amount of Rs.2017/- as cheque bounce charges. Even though the complainant had made seven cash payments for the cheque which was bounced, the opposite party had illegally collected nine bounce charges till May 2009 from the complainant. The opposite parties had also un necessarily charged an amount of Rs.4577/- towards overdue charges from the complainant which he is not liable to pay.
Even though the complainant told the opposite parties to show as to how he becomes liable to pay more than two lakh rupees to close the loan account the opposite parties failed to give proper explanation. The collection agent who came to collect money from the complainant were always rude to the complainant and never gave satisfactory replies to the complainant regarding the balance amount due. The complainant is only liable to pay Rs.1,24,605/- to the loan account. Even though the complainant contacted the opposite parties on several occasions the opposite parties have failed to give detailed account statement to the complainant. Now the opposite parties have sent a legal notice to the complainant informing him that an amount of Rs.1,02,470/- is due outstanding towards the auto loan numbered LACT00011296706. When the complainant contacted the first opposite party and told him to give a detailed account statement he told the complainant to remit this amount first, in order to receive the account statement. Even though the complainant told the first opposite party that he is only liable to pay an amount of Rs.1,24,605/- towards the loan account. The first opposite party told the complainant that the complainant is liable to pay more than two lakh rupees towards the loan account. The act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice and negligence on the part of opposite parties. So complainant seeking relief against the opposite parties directing them to give a detailed account statement of the auto loan account and also directing the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- for loss, damage and mental agony suffered by the complainant , along with compensation of Rs.10,000/-.
Opposite parties entering in appearance and filed their version stating that it is true that this opposite party had advanced a sum of Rs.2,85,000/- as vehicle loan to the complainant on executing a loan agreement, agreeing to pay the amount in monthly installment of Rs.9665/-. The complainant is also well aware that as per the terms of loan agreement regular payment of equated monthly installment is the essence of the contract and in case of default the customer have expressly authorized the opposite party to take back the possession of the vehicle with or without notice. After taking a huge amount of loan from this opposite parties the complainant has now approached this forum with false and baseless allegation in order to obtain an interim order. Accordingly the Hon’ble Forum granted an interim order in his favour directing him to deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- before the forum. But the said order dtd.14.01.2010 is not honoured by the complainant till date. No deficiency of service on the part of opposite party therefore complaint is liable to be dismissed.
Points for consideration
- Whether any deficiency of service on the part of Oppositeparty?
- Whether complainant is entitled to get any compensation from the opposite party? If so what is the relief and cost?
Complainant was continuously absent from 09.07.2012 onwards , case is specifically posted for appearance of complainant. On 31.01.2013 from there onwards complainant was continuously absent. On perusal of the complaint itself admitted that complainant was a habitual defaulter against opposite party. On filing of this complaint itself, complainant has outstanding amount due towards opposite parties Rs.1,90,605/- out of that Fora directed to deposit Rs.25,000/- but that order also not complied by the complainant. On perusal of documents there is no merit in this case during this period some amount has been paid to him that are not enough to full fill the condition of the opposite party. In totality of the case there is no merit in this case, therefore complaint is liable to be dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court this the 15th day of December 2014.
Date of filing: 13.01.2010.
SD/-PRESIDENT SD/-MEMBER
//True copy//
(Forwarded/By Order)
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
