SUNIL DALVAI Vs. TATA CAPITAL LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.460/2009 on the file of Dist Forum-III, Hyderabad, the complainant preferred this appeal.

(2.) The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant is doing business of post production work of Movies-DVDs. In the first week of August,2008 the complainant purchased Toyota Innova vehicle bearing no.AP.37 X 7010 from J.Ravi Kumar, Bhimavaram, West Godavari Dist. The said vehicle was transferred in the name of the complainant in the first week of November,2008 and the number of the said vehicle was re registered as AP 16 AS 8719. In the second week of August, 2008, the complainant approached opp.party no.1 for loan on the said vehicle, who, in turn sent the complainant to opp.party no.2 for arranging the said loan. Opposite party no.2 informed the complainant that he is the direct sales agent of opp.party no.1 and he will arrange the loan on the said vehicle from opp.party no.1 company. Opposite parties 1 and 2 have collected necessary documents from the complainant including 7 blank cheques drawn on ICICI Bank Ltd., Nallakunta, Hyd. for the purpose of security of loan. The complainant is having current account in ICICi Bank Ltd., Nallakunta Branch, Hyderabad vide current account bearing no.037005000810 and opp.parties 1 and 2 have taken ECs authorization from the complainant for monthly instalments of EMI to the account of the opp.party no.1 company. On the same day opp.parties 1 and 2 have obtained signatures of the complainant on some papers and informed that whenever the said vehicle is reregistered on his name and hypothecated on TATA Capital Ltd. the loan will be sanctioned to him. In the first week of November, 2008 the said vehicle was re registered in the name of the complainant and hypothecation was also done in the name of TATA Capital Ltd. The same is informed to the opp.parties 1 and 2 and the copy of the registration was also sent to opp.party no.2. Opp.party no.3 is working as Accounts Manager in the opp.party no.1 company and the complainant contacted opposite parties 1 to 3 but they postponed the granting of loan on one pretext or the other.

(3.) In the first week of December,2008 opposite party no.1 informed the complainant that the loan was sanctioned to him and issued a D.D. bearing no.073216 drawn on Axis Bank Ltd. for an amount of Rs.3,75,234/- as against the agreed loan amount of Rs.3,96,000/-. The complainant verified his bank account and noticed that already 3 monthly instalments of Rs.14,160/- per month was encashed by opp.party no.1 company from his account basing on the ECs authorisation issued by him. Hence the complainant returned the said DD to opp.party no.1 vide letter dt.9.12.2008 stating that he has not received any loan amount till 6th December,2008 and hence demanded interest amount of Rs.17,989.04 along with approved loan amount of Rs.3,96,000/-. Opposite party no.1 received the said DD and failed to issue the new DD for loan amount as per the commitment. On persistent demands made by the complainant, opp.party no.2 came forward and issued a cheque bearing no.340433 drawn on HDFC Bank Ltd., Lakdikapool Branch, Hyderabad for an amount of Rs.4,10,000/- on 5.1.2009 and informed the complainant to deposit on 12.1.2009. The complainant deposited the said cheque as per the instructions of opp.party no.2 and the same was returned with an endorsement of ?insufficient funds? vide cheque return memo dt.13.1.2009. Opposite party no.3 who is working as Accounts Manager in the opp.party no.1 company colluded with opp.party no.1 and misleaded the complainant and falsely obtained documents, signatures on papers and ECs authorization and collected 3 months instalment of Rs.14,160/- per month from the complainant?s account in ICICI Bank Ltd. without advancing loan amount to the complainant. The complainant filed a complaint before Hon'ble VII Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate who referred the complaint to Malakpet P.S. and the said Police Station registered the case vide FIR No.43 of 2009. The complainant sent several E mails to the opp.parties stating that the cheque given by them was not encashed for which the opp.party gave a reply stating that due to some problem they are not able to fulfill the cheque amount and within a week they will provide the entire amount in the complainant?s account. But the opp.parties did not deposit the amount and moreover the opp.party people demanded the complainant to pay the entire loan amount otherwise they will seize the vehicle. Vexed with the attitude of opposite parties the complainant sent a legal notice dt.20.4.2009 calling upon the opp.parties to return all the documents which were obtained from him and also return an amount of Rs.56,640/- with interest and also issue a letter cancelling the hypothecation of the above said vehicle. The opposite parties received notice but failed to give any reply. Hence the complaint seeking direction to the opp.parties to return all the documents obtained from the complainant including blank cheques, to return an amount of Rs.56,640/-along with interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of receipt till the date of realization, to cancel the hypothecation of the said vehicle and to issue No Due Certificate to the complainant in respect of vehicle bearing no.AP 16 AS 8719, to pay compensation of Rs.2 lakhs towards the mental agony and torture and loss suffered by the complainant and also liable to pay punitive damages U/s. 14(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act and to award costs of Rs.3000/-.