IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA,
Dated this the 17th day of November, 2012.
Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President)
Sri. N. Premkumar (Member)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member)
C.C.No.107/2012 (Filed on 01.06.2012)
Between:
Babu Vazhuvelil,
Vazhuvelil Veedu,
Thuvayoor Thekku.P.O.,
Kadampanadu – 691 552.
(By Adv. Karunamol) …. Complainant
And:
Mr. Bobby @ Podikunju,
Proprietor,
Thekkeveettil Financiers,
Thuvayoor Junction,
Thuvayoor North.P.O.,
Adoor – 691552. …. Opposite party
O R D E R
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member):
Complainant filed this complaint against the opposite party for getting a relief from the Forum.
2. Brief facts of this case is as follows: Opposite party is the Proprietor of Thekkeveettil Financiers. Complainant pledged his gold ornaments weighing 60 gms. with the opposite party and availed two loans amounting ` 52,000. As per the terms of contract, the loan carries an interest at the rate of 1% per month. According to the complainant, he had paid the interest amounting to ` 8,000 on various dates for which the opposite party didn’t given valid receipts. Even though the complainant contacted the opposite party on several dates for making the payment of his dues for taking back the pledged ornaments, the opposite party evaded either to receive the money or to return the gold ornaments by saying lame excuses. Then the complainant filed a complaint before the Dy.S.P., Adoor in this regard. Then the opposite party agreed before the Dy.S.P that he had mistakenly released the said ornaments to another loanee and the said loanee will be located and gold ornaments of the complainant will be returned within 2 months.
3. After expiry of 2 months, complainant sent legal notice to the opposite party. But he had not turned up. The act of the opposite party caused great financial loss and mental agony to the complainant. Hence this complaint for getting the ornaments weighing 60 grams or to realize the market value of the ornaments with 12% interest along compensation of ` 25,000 and cost of this proceedings.
4. In this case opposite party is exparte.
5. On the basis of the allegation in the complaint, the only point to be considered is whether this complaint can be allowed or not?
6. The evidence in this case consists of the proof affidavit of the complainant and Ext.A1 to A6. After closure of evidence, complainant was heard.
7. The Point:- Complainant’s allegation against the opposite party is that he had pledged gold ornaments weighing 60 gms. with the opposite party and availed a loan of ` 52,000. He had remitted interest amounting ` 8,000 on various dates but opposite party didn’t issued valid receipts. Complainant approached the opposite party on several time for making the payment of his dues for getting the pledged gold but the opposite party is evading either to receive the money or to return the gold ornaments by saying lame excuses. The above said act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service and opposite party is liable to the complainant.
7. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the complainant filed proof affidavit along with 6 documents and on the basis of the proof affidavit, the documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A6. Ext.A1 is the gold loan receipt No.A/23 dated 19.01.2008. Ext.A2 is the gold loan receipt No.A/27 dated 21.01.2008. Ext.A3 is the receipt issued by Dy.S.P, Adoor for receiving the complainant’s petition against the opposite party. Ext.A4 is the copy of legal notice dated 19.12.2011 issued to the opposite party. Ext.A5 is the postal receipt of Ext.A4. Ext.A6 is the postal acknowledgment card of Ext.A4.
8. From the available evidence, Ext.A1 and Ext.A2 loan receipts, it is seen that the complainant pledged his ornaments with the opposite party and received ` 52,000. Since the opposite party is exparte, complainant’s allegation that his gold ornaments were not returned by the opposite party stands proved as unchallenged. The above said act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service. Therefore, this complaint can be allowed with compensation and cost. However, the claim for compensation is not supported with evidence. Hence prayer for compensation cannot be allowed as prayed for.
9. In the result, this complaint is allowed, thereby the opposite party is directed to return gold ornaments pledged as per Ext.A1 and A2 or its present market value with compensation of ` 10,000 (Rupees Ten thousand only) and cost of ` 1,000 (Rupees One thousand only) within 15 days from the date of this order, failing which the complainant is allowed to realize the present market value of 60 grams of gold along with the compensation and cost ordered herein above with 12% interest for the entire amount from today till the realization of the whole amount. Further complainant is directed to return the loan amount of ` 52,000 and its interest as per the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India upto 30.10.2010, the date on which he submitted the complaint before Dy.S.P, Adoor, to the opposite party on getting the gold or the amount from the opposite party as ordered by this Forum.
Declared in the Open Forum on this the 17th day of November, 2012.
(Sd/-)
K.P. Padmasree,
(Member)
Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) : (Sd/-)
Sri. N. Premkumar (Member) : (Sd/-)
Appendix:
Witness examined on the side of the complainant: Nil
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:
A1 : Gold loan receipt No.A/23 dated 19.01.2008.
A2 : Gold loan receipt No.A/27 dated 21.01.2008.
A3 : Receipt dated 30.10.2010 issued by Dy.S.P, Adoor.
A4 : Copy of legal notice dated 19.12.2011 sent by the
complainant to the opposite party.
A5 : Postal receipt of Ext.A4.
A6 : Postal acknowledgment card of Ext.A4.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party: Nil
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant: Nil
(By Order)
(Sd/-)
Senior Superintendent
Copy to:- (1) Babu Vazhuvelil, Vazhuvelil Veedu,
Thuvayoor Thekku.P.O., Kadampanadu – 691 552.
(2) Mr. Bobby @ Podikunju, Proprietor,
Thekkeveettil Financiers, Thuvayoor Junction,
Thuvayoor North.P.O., Adoor – 691552.
(3) The Stock File.
