Act for an order directing the opposite parties to furnish detailed account statement showing the actual amount due by the complainant and to close the account after receipt of the amount with ` 10,000 as compensation and cost.

          The case in brief of the complainant is that he is an agriculturist and has availed eight loan from the 1^st opposite party through 2^nd opposite party for developing agriculture and also availed a long term loan for improving his residential building.  The 1^st opposite party is bound to impose interest, penal interest etc on loans as per the stipulations of RBI, NABARD.   Since opposite parties are disbursing loans as per their direction.  The details of loans taken and repaid by the complainant is as follows.  The first loan is loan No.CRS-63 availed for the improvement of coconut cultivation on 19.05.1990, which was given by 1^st opposite party under the financial assistance of NABARD.  The opposite parties had sanctioned ` 17,930 as loan and disbursed in four instalments dated 19.05.1990 (10,980), 20.08.1991 and 26.02.1992 and 20.10.1993.  The complainant have repaid ` 23,289.90 as on 04.05.99 through 8 instalments  such as ` 2,149 on 26.02.1992, ` 1702.90 on 29.01.1993, ` 1794 on 21.03.1994, ` 1794 on 06.03.1995, ` 1810 on 21.03.1980, ` 4780 on 04.03.1997, ` 3,942 on ` 504.99 and ` 5312 on 04.05.1999.

          The next loan availed by the complainant is for ` 25,000 having loan No.PH/coconut-1382 on 09.10.99 and the term of the loan is for 12 years and the complainant is expected to repay the same as yearly rest with effect from 2000 March.  The complainant has not made any repayment towards this loan.

          The next loan is for an amount of ` 2,40,040 for cashew cultivation having loan No.PH/Cashew-171.  But the opposite party has paid only `21,220 by way of three instalments and the term of the loan was for 12 years repayable as yearly rest with effect from 1995 March and the rate of interest was 12%.  The complainant has repaid 10,714 by way of four instalments namely ` 661 on 31.03.1995, ` 2,233 on 21.03.1996, ` 2334 on 04.03.1997, ` 5436 on 30.04.1999.

          The fourth loan was taken for construction of bund across the agricultural land for an amount of ` 29,000 and the interest was 12% and the term of the loan is for 10 years.  The complainant had repaid `9764 by four instalments such as ` 2,587 on 21.03.1996, ` 1877 on 04.03.1997, ` 3671 on 30.04.1999, ` 1829 on 30.06.2000.

          Fifth loan is taken for the construction of bunds and for construction of boundary walls for the agricultural land for an amount of `14000.  The term of the loan is for 10 years and repayable with effect from December, 1995 and had repaid ` 11,929 through three instalments as on 30.04.1999.  This loan is repayable by a period of 10 years with effect from December, 1995.

          Sixth loan was availed in the year 1994 for digging pond for an amount of ` 14000 and the loan number is MIFR-SS-203.  The period of repayment is for 15 years with effect from December, 1994 and interest is 12%.  The complainant has repaid ` 10,245 by two instalments as `4,881 on 30.04.1997, ` 5364 on 30.04.99 6^th loan was availed for fresh plantation of rubber trees for an amount of ` 21,480 having No.WBR-11 (PH Rubber 2/94-95) and was disbursed under a scheme of World Bank and NABARD.  The World Bank has provided 3% subsidy on interest and repayable after 7 years from the date of availing loan and repayment period is 13 years.  The loan was sanctioned on 14.06.1994 and no repayment is made in the loan.

          The 7^th loan is also for rubber plantation which is a subsidized loan and ` 12,760 was disbursed on six instalments.  The complainant has repaid ` 9759 by four instalments such as ` 2407 on 21.05.1997, `832 on 30.06.1994, ` 1019 on 04.02.1996 and ` 5501 on 30.04.99.

          The loan number RHL-347 was sanctioned for the improvement of his residential house.  The repayment period is 20 years and the amount sanctioned is ` 60,000 and disbursed to the complainant on 3 instalments.  The complainant has repaid ` 52,343 by 7 instalments ie `6500 on 17.04.1996, ` 5979 on 22.10.96, ` 5852 on 30.04.1997, `5782. On 07.11.97, ` 5899 on 28.06.1998, ` 11090 on 30.04.1999 and `11,433 on 20.06.2000.

          The opposite parties are imposing interest, penal interest, miscellaneous charges, in respect of all legal norms and the opposite parties are capitalizing penal interest as well as interest and also substantial amounts are levying by way of miscellaneous charges.  The opposite parties are not providing the subsidies benefit of interest and the benefit of moratorium promulgamated by Kerala Government etc provided by World Bank, NABARD and Rubber Board.  This acts of the opposite parties were for extorting money from the Farmers including the complainant.  5% of the amount was paid by the complainant to opposite party as share value.

          The complainant made a written request for proper accounting of the amount paid by him since he realized that the opposite parties are not accounting the repayment properly.  But the complainant has constrained to issue a lawyer notice since there was no proper accounting or reply from opposite party. The complainant submitted written memorandum to the authorities like Rubber Board, NABARD, Registrar of Co-operative Societies and Minister of Co-operative Department etc on 22.06.2004.  So the Registrar of Kuthuparamba has conducted an enquiry and found that opposite parties are imposing illegal amounts by way of interest and miscellaneous charge from the agriculturist and in the light of that findings J.R. of Co-operative Societies has issued a direction dated 17.02.2005 directing the Co-operative banks of Kannur to refund the excess amount collected from the Agriculturists by way of illegal interest and miscellaneous charges.

          As per the foreclosure notice dated 24.10.02, ` 1,87,393 was shown as the entire dues from the complainant which includes 24% interest.  In the sale notice issued by the Sale Officer dated 24.01.2004 it was shown as ` 2,60,319.  But in the registered notice issued by the Sale Officer dated 18.05.05, it is ` 2,93,900 and in another notice issued by Sale Officer dated 06.10.05 it is ` 2,39,583.  The opposite parties had issued a reply letter showing the amount to be repaid is ` 2,99,416, in pursuance to the notice issued by the complainant for the detailed account statement.  So the complainant was compelled to file a writ petition before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala with a prayer to stop the proceedings initiated against the complainant.  The High Court directed the opposite parties to provide detailed account statement.  But due to default on the part of 1^st opposite party to comply the order the complainant again filed an interlocutory application for direction, the Hon’ble High Court has again pleased to issue a direction, But the opposite parties have not completed the order.  So due to the non-obtainment of calculation statement the complainant was not able to repay the loan.  The complainant is ready to clean all the loan provided the opposite parties have to levy interest as per law.  There was massive destruction of agricultural crops belonging to the complainant by the attack of wild animals and hence the complainant has suffered huge loss.  As per the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala to pay compensation on account of crop destruction, the Revenue department has assessed the loss and the proceedings are going on.

          Substantial portion of the amount paid by the complainant is illegally accounted by the 2^nd opposite party towards interest, penal interest and miscellaneous charge and hence there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party.  The opposite parties are imposing the earlier rates of interest against the direction of R.B.I., Co-operative department to levy reduced interest on agricultural loans.  The complainant is entitled to get the benefit of Agricultural debt relief sanctioned by the Government of Kerala during 2003.  Due to inaction of the opposite party complainant could not pay net amount in the said loans during the year 2005 thereby the complainant has suffered financial loss.  The complainant has suffered much mental pain and agony due to the irresponsible attitude of opposite parties.  Hence this complaint.

          In response to the notice issued by the Forum both opposite parties appeared and filed their version.  The opposite parties admits that the complainant had availed loans from the opposite party bank.  The total liability as on 31.08.2006 is ` 321827.  But the total amount need to clear all liability of the above loans as per one time settlement as on 31.08.06 is ` 2,94,041.  Eventhough till 2000 the petitioner has been regularly paying loan amount, after formation of organizations such as INFARM, Farmers Relief Forum etc, he deliberately abstained from repayment of the loan.  All the payments made by him are credited to respective loan accounts.  The payments made and to be credited against interest cannot be credited against Principal and hence the allegations that opposite parties are not properly accounting the amount paid by him towards the repayment of the loans are not correct.  If any subsidies are giving those are extending to the persons who are repaying the overdues properly.  According to opposite parties no exorbitant interest has been charged on the loan amount against the directions, circulars or notifications of RBI, Registrar of Co-operative Society etc and the allegations on the contrary is only for the purpose of the case.  The opposite parties are not capitalizing penal interest as well as interest on interest.   Opposite parties have never claimed 24% interest.   The allegation with respect to reduction in price of agricultural products, droughts, pests, attack by wild animals are without any bonafides and made only to escape from recovery.  The are no such incidents of such a gravity which precluded the Agriculturiest from paying the debts.  The district collector has denied and rejected the plea of the complainant’s request with reference to the attack by wild animals.    If any benefit was declared within year 2003, the complainant is not entitled the same, since he failed to repay the over due and liabilities during the period when such programme is alive and benefits are offered to the small holders of agricultural land.  The complainant in this case is not a small holder of agricultural land.  He mortgaged a total extent of 6.36 acre of land to the opposite party bank and all the benefit offered by Government is a device to encourage the repayment of loans and not for abstaining from repayment.   The complainant has stopped the repayment from the year 2000 onwards.  The complainant has availed loans from all schemes offered from the bank and after utilizing the loan and without re-paying the regular instalments he opted to file several cases and complaints before different authorities.  As per the order in I.A.2607/04 in OP.11695/03 the Hon’ble High Court directed the complainant to remit `50,000 within one month from the date of order, but the complainant failed to comply the order of Hon’ble High Court.

          The opposite party bank had initiated legal action to realize the dues.  Sale proceedings against the complainant.  The complainant is filing petitions after petition without genuine reasons.  The complainant is estopped to raise those contentions which are raised before the High Court, before the Forum.  O.T.S. is introduced to clear off the overdue of loans which was in existence from 27.02.2006 to 31.12.2006 and several notices were issued to complainant to clear the liabilities, but he has not turned up.  If the complainant is ready to repay the loan with the prescribed and contract rate of interest within the prescribed period the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties can extend the OTS scheme benefit to the complainant.  The complaint has been filed as an experiment so as to protract repayment of overdue and loan amount which he has to repay. The Forum has no jurisdiction to try the case as per Section 69 and 100 of Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and hence the complaint is liable to the dismissed.

          Upon the above contention the following issues have been raised for consideration.

1.        Whether Forum has jurisdiction to try the case?

2.        Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties?

3.        Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief?

4.        Relief and cost?

The evidence in the above case consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts. A1 to A69.

Issue No. 1:

          The opposite parties contended that the Forum has no jurisdiction to try the case as per Section 69 and 100 of Kerala Co-operative Societies Act.  But in Secretary, Thirumugham Co-operative Agricultural Credit Society Vs M. Lalitha, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that remedy under C.P. Act, 1986 was in addition to and not in derogation of other remedies available and hence the complaint is maintainable before the Forum.  So we are of the opinion that it is a well settled position of law that this complaint is maintainable before the Forum and hence Issue No.1 is found in favour of the complainant.

Issues No.2 to 4 :

          The further case of the complainant is that he had availed eight long term loan for agricultural development and one long term for improving his residential house. Eventhough the complainant has repaid same amount in some of the loans opposite parties are not accounted the same properly.  Moreover they have not consider the moratorium benefit and other benefits offered by the Government from time to time and imposing penal interest etc. In order to prove his case he has examined and produced 69 documents including gahan, receipts, pass books, notice, application under RTI Act, and questionares etc.  The opposite parties contended that they have issued detailed statement during 2009 January.  But according to the complainant it is not proper while going through the receipts.  It is seen that the opposite parties have levied penal interest and miscellaneous charges and also seen that the amount paid by the complainant is not properly accounted.   The opposite parties have not given any satisfactory explanation for this.  As per Circular No.41/02 the complainant is entitled to get moratorium benefit for six months from 29.12.2001.  He is also entitled to get moratorium benefit for one year from 23.01.04 as per circular No.25/04 issued by the Regisrar of Co-operative Societies.  As per Circular No.17/05, the revised interest rate of 8.5% to 9% is also applicable to all loans availed by the complainant from 16.03.2005 onwards.  The complainant is entitled to get 3% subsidies for the loan taken for rubber cultivation as per Ext.A 69 document.  But while going through Ext.A 65 Account Statement, it is seen that no interest subsidaries are credited in the account.  From the above discussions it is seen that there is deficiency on the part of opposite parties for which they are liable to issue a fresh statement of account to the complainant considering all the above facts along with `3,000 as compensation and ` 2000 as cost of the proceedings and allow the complainant to close the loan account after payment of dues and passed order accordingly.

          In the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties to issue a true and correct calculation statement with respect to all loans availed by crediting the moratorium benefits as per circular No.41/02 and 25/04 subsidiaries benefit as per A.69 document, without charging miscellaneous charge, and reducing interest rate as 9% to all loans from 16.03.05 onwards and by accounting the amount paid by the complainant correctly along with ` 3000 (Rupees Three Thousand only) as compensation and ` 2000 (Rupees One Thousand only) as cost of proceedings to the complainant within one month from the date of rceipt of this order and allow the complainant to close the account after payment of dues within 15 days of receipt of calculation statement from opposite party.  Otherwise complainant can execute the order as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act.

                             Sd/-                    Sd/-                        

                       President               Member    

APPENDIX

Exhibits for the Complainant

A1.   True copy of passbook pertaining to loan No. CRS 63.

A2.   Copy of receipt regarding loan No.CRS.63 dated 26.02.92.

A3.   Receipt regarding CRS.63 dated 29.01.93.

A4.   Receipt dated 21.03.94 of same loan.

A5.   Receipt dated 06.03.95 of same loan.

A6.   Receipt dated 21.03.96 of same loan.

A7.   Receipt dated 04.03.97 of same loan.

A8.   Receipt dated 30.04.99 of same loan.

A9.   Receipt dated 04.05.99 of same loan.

A10. True copy of gahan of loan No.P.H. coconut 1382 dated 09.10.99.

A11. True copy of gahan of loan No.P.H. cashew 171 till date.

A12. True photocopy of passbook of loan no. P.H.cashew 171.

A13.  Copy of receipt dated 31.03.1999 loan No.P.H. cashew 171.

A14.  Receipt dated 21.03.96 of same loan.

A15.  Receipt dated 04.03.97 of same loan.

A16.  Receipt dated 30.04.99 of same loan.

A17.  True copy of gahan loan No. L-D.1 dated 21.07.1994.

A18.  True copy of pass book regarding loan No. L-D-I.

A19.  Receipt dated 30.04.99.

A20.  Receipt dated 30.06.00.

A21.  Photocopy of gahan dated 21.12.94 regarding loan No. L.D. 26.

A22.  Photocopy of pass book regarding same loan.

A23.  Receipt dated 21.03.1996.

A24.  Receipt dated 04.03.97.

A25.  Receipt dated 30.04.1999.

A26.  True copy of gahan regarding loan No.RSS 203 dated 21.12.99.

A27.  Copy of passbook.

A28.  Receipt dated 30.04.1997.

A29.  Receipt dated 30.04.1999.

A30.  True copy of gahan dated 21.07.94. of loan No.PH rubber WBR-2.

A31.  True copy of pass book regarding loan No.RPDX46.

A32.  Copy of receipt dated 21.05.97.

A33.  Receipt dated 30.04.99.

A34.  True copy of gahan of RHN 347.

A35.  True copy of passbook.

A36.  Receipt dated 17.04.96.

A37.  Receipt dated 22.10.96.

A38.  Receipt dated 30.04.97.

A39.  Receipt dated 07.11.97.

A40.  Receipt dated 26.06.98.

A41.  Receipt dated 30.04.99.

A42.  Receipt dated 20.06.2000 of same loan.

A43.  Copy of letter by J.R. of Kannur to complainant dated 17.02.05.

A44.  Copy of receipt dated 21.03.1996 of loan No.L-D-I.

A45.  Receipt dated 04.03.97.

A46.  Notice dated 06.10.05 by sale officer of OP’s bank.

A47.  Notice dated 18.05.05.

A48.  Notice dated 24.01.04.

A49.  Notice dated 24.10.02 issued by 1^st OP.

A50.  Letter by Co-op. register dated 18.11.04 to complainant.

A51.  True copy of lawyer notice dated 24.10.05.

A52.  Certificate of posting dated 24.10.05.

A53.  Postal receipt dated 24.10.2005.

A54.  Reply dated 26.10.05 from Sale officer.

A55.  Letter dated 02.11.2005 from 2^nd OP to complainant.

A56.  Copy of lawyer notice dated 05.11.05.

A57.  Certificate of posting dated 05.11.05.

A58.  Letter dated 31.10.05 to 2^nd OP.

A59.  Copy of application to 2^nd OP under RI Act dated 17.12.08.

A60.  Answer dated 16.01.09 by 2^nd OP.

A61.  Original pass book.

A62.  Notice dated 01.12.06 by Spl. Sale Officer to complainant.

A63.  Notice by sale officer dated 15.01.09.

A64.  Application under RTI Act.

A65.  Account Statement issued to complainant.

A66.  Copy of circular dated 10.04.06 by Co-op. department.

A67.  Answer furnished by 1^st OP dated 20.03.09 und RTI Act.

A68.  Questionnaire under R.T.A with reply dated 19.09.08 by NABARD.

A69.  Question dated 11.08.08 under RTI Act to RBI and reply dated  

         30.09.10. from RBI of India.

Exhibits for the opposite party

Nil

Witness examined for the complainant

PW1. Complainant.

Witness examined for opposite party

Nil

      /forwarded by order/

                                                                     SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT