Decided on May 23,2010

Pawan Investments Appellant
H Prashanth Kumar And Ors Respondents


- (1.)THE appellant is the first opposite party in CC No. 71/06 in the file of CDRF, Kasaragod. The appellant along with the second opposite party is under orders to refund a sum of Rs. 58,000 to the complainant. It is also directed that on receipt of the amount the complainant shall return the original RC to the first opposite party. The first and second opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs. 2,000 towards costs.
(2.)IT is the case of the complainant that he availed a vehicle loan for a sum of Rs. 1,20,000 from the first opposite party with respect to the Jeep having Reg. No. KL 06/A5002 on 21.12.2003 which was payable with interest within a period of 24 months. The amount to be repaid with interest would work out to Rs. 1,48,000. Two blank signed cheques from the guarantor was also obtained. The complainant remitted Rs.78,000. Due to illness he could not permit the balance after 23.6.2005. The opposite parties seized the Jeep. The complainant approached the second opposite party with cash to clear the dues in the month of May, 2006. But was told that the Jeep was already sold by the first opposite party. His request for no dues letter and return of the cheque leaves was turned down. According to him the sale price of the Jeep would be Rs. 1,50,000 it is alleged that the opposite parties 1 and 2 applied to the 3rd opposite party the RTO for getting the RC book from the complainant. The complainant received a notice from the RTO in this regard. The complainant is willing to cooperate with the opposite parties. He has sought for adjusting the amounts paid and the amounts obtained by the resale of the Jeep towards the dues and for return of the balance amount and the cheques entrusted as security. He has sought for compensation of Rs.1,00,000.
(3.)THE opposite parties 1 and 2 filed joint version admitting the payment of Rs. 78,000. It is stated that the opposite parties cannot sell the vehicle as the complainant has not handed over the original RC book. It is denied that the vehicle would fetch Rs. 1,50,000 it would fetch only less than Rs.1,00,000 as sale price. The dues of the complainant would work out to Rs. 1,59,670. The entrustment of blank cheques is denied.
The 3rd opposite party did not file any version. It is seen that the appellant did not contest the matter before the Forum. The Forum has considered the evidence adduced in the matter and consisted of the proof affidavit of the complainant and Ex. Al to A4 i.e. the receipts issued by the opposite parties for payment A5 to A6 and Ex. Bl true copy of RC produced by OP3.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.