MOHD. ZKEER AHMED KHAN Vs. SRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO., LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant is the appellant. The factual matrix of the case as narrated by the appellant is that one G.Hanumanlu purchased Ashok Leyland lorry bearing registration no. AP 01E 7529 by availing the finance from the opposite parties no.1 and 2. Hanumanlu was due a sum of Rs.82,650/- as on 20.9.2005. The opposite parties were liable to pay the amount of Rs.59,000/- to Hanumanlu towards his insurance claim. On assurance given by the opposite parties that the insurance claim amount would be paid to him, the complainant paid the sale consideration to Hanumanlu. The complainants name was mutated in the RTA records. The opposite parties provided the loan to the complainant. It was agreed that the complainant has to pay the amount in 24 instalments with first six instalments @ Rs.21,000/- per month and the remaining 18 instalments @ Rs.14,000/- per month. The complainant paid Rs.15,000/- on 29.12.2005, Rs.25,000/- on 8.2.2006, Rs.21,000/- on 26.4.2006, Rs.21,000/- on 6.6.2006, Rs.22,000/- on 28 .6.2006, a total amount of Rs.1,04,000/-.

(2.) The complainant requested the opposite parties to adjust the insurance claim amount to the monthly instalments and issued the receipts on 20.1.2007. The opposite parties broke open the lock of the cabin and taken away the lorry parked on the road leading from Nirmal to Adilabad . In the lorry the driver Shakeer and one Mujaheed kept a bag containing Rs.60,000/-. At the time they had gone for taking the meals the lorry was taken away by the opposite parties no.1 and 2. Shakeer and Mujaheed Khan lodged a complaint with the police concerned. The police inspite of having knowledge that the opposite parties committed theft of the lorry and the money therein, have not registered any case against the opposite parties no.1 and 2. The opposite parties had sanctioned loan a sum of Rs.3,78,000/- which was agreed to be paid along with interest. The opposite parties have claimed Rs.6,65,000/- and the interest, an amount of Rs.2,79,300/-. The opposite parties committed deficient service. Hence, the complainant prayed for a direction to the opposite parties i) not to auction the vehicle, ii) handover the vehicle to the complainant and iii) for a direction to the opposite parties to file calculation memo.

(3.) The opposite parties contested the claim contending that G.Hanumanlu purchased the lorry on taking loan from UTI Bank Begumpet Branch Hyderabad under Tripartite Agreement with the opposite parties. On failure of G.Hanumanlu to clear th monthly instalments due, the complainant approached the opposite party at Nizamabad with a proposal to purchase the vehicle on providing loan to him. The opposite parties sanctioned the loan to the complainant an amount of Rs.6,65,000/- @ 10.5% interest per annum payable in 45 EMI, from first instalment 36 instalments @ Rs.21,623/- per month and from 37 to 44 instalments Rs.21,123/- per month and 45th instalment an amount of Rs.14,888/-. The opposite parties paid the sanctioned loan amount of Rs.6,65,000/- to the UTI Bank on behalf of the complainant against the loan due standing in the name of G.Hanumanlu on execution of loan-cum-hypothecation agreement, demand promissory note and other relevant document on 1.11.2005 by the complainant and the guarantor Mohd. Yousuf Ahmed Khan. The opposite parties have no liability to pay Rs.59,000/- towards insurance claim amount to the complainant.