M.THANIKACHALAM, J. - (1.) The opposite parties are the appellants.
(2.) The respondent/ complainant, availing the financial aid, from the opposite parties, had purchased a Tata Hitachi EX 110 Poclain, under hypothecation agreement dt.29.11.2003, by producing the original invoice, issued by the manufacturer, at the time of the hypothecation, which is to be served as RC, since for poclain no RC was issued. As per the hypothecation agreement, as agreed, amounts were paid from January 2004, and the entire due was discharged, in the month of December 2006. After settling the debt, when the complainant requested the original invoice, since he wanted to sell the vehicle, for which original invoice is absolutely necessary, as RC, the opposite party failed to handover the same, thereby depriving the sale, causing monetary loss, and despite several request for the past 3 years, the request of the complainant was not complied with, thereby the opposite party had committed deficiency in service. Hence the complainant is constrained to file the case, for the return of the original invoice, or in the alternative for the recovery of a sum of Rs.4 lakhs as compensation, alongwith a sum of Rs.50000/- for mental agony, with cost of Rs.25000/-.
(3.) The opposite party, not challenging the ownership of the poclain, as well as the hypothecation, as well as the discharge of the loan also, resisted the case contending, that no original invoice was given to the opposite parties, whereas only Xerox copy of the invoice was given, that inspite of the copy given, the opposite parties have undertook to give a duplicate, for which the complainant was not willing that even now they are ready to get duplicate copy of the invoice, at their own risk and cost, and this being the position, there is no deficiency of service or negligence, praying for the dismissal of the case.;