IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/30/2021
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
07.07.2021 09.08.2021 17.04.2023
Complainant: Samiul Sk,,
S/o – Samsul Sk,
Vill: Bagan Para, P.O., Natun Para Raipur,
P.S.-Berhampore,
Dist- Murshidabad, Pin-742165
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Branch Manager,
ICICI Bank,
Berhampore Branch,
Of Kadbeltola,
P.O. – Boalidanga, P.S.- Berhampore,
Pin-742102, W.B.
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Pranab Kumar Das
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party : Indranil Banerjee
Present: Sri Ajay Kumar Das…………………………..........President.
Sri. Nityananda Roy…………………………………….Member.
FINAL ORDER
Sri. ajay kumar das, presiding member.
This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.
One Samiul Sk. (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against the Branch Manager, ICICI Bank, Berhampore Branch of Kadbeltola (here in after referred to as the O.P.) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.
The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-
The Complainant is a consumer under the O.P. and he approached for financial assistance to deposit his Gold Ornaments before the O.P.
After inspection the O.P. sanctioned a gold loan by depositing of Gold ornaments measuring 26.37 grams on 20.11.2018. Then, the O.P. credited Rs. 48,000/- in favour of the Complainant. As per condition the Complainant would repay the said loan amount within 11 months i.e., by 20.11.2019. The loan account of the Complainant is 090105019424.
Due to raise money the Complainant could not repay the loan amount with interest. So, he applied for renewal of the said loan and also requested the O.P. to give some time for repayment of the loan amount.
But without any due process of law the O.P. sold the gold ornaments. The Complainant came to know at first time when he received a post sale notice on 05.11.2020 and he found that the O.P. without pre auction notice and also without any pre sale notice sold the said ornaments.
The Complainant also came to know from the post sale notice dated 05.11.2020 that the said gold ornaments have been sold by the O.P. for Rs. 1,01,524/- and the O.P. has adjusted the outstanding of Rs. 57,976/-. So, the excess amount is Rs. 43,548/-. The Complainant further came to know from the said notice that the auction notice had issued on 27.08.2020 at that time the gold price was Rs. 5168/- per gram, the weight of the said gold ornament was 26.37 grams so total value of the said gold ornament on 27.08.2020 was Rs. 1,36,280/-. So, it is clear that the O.P. has written some inflated price of the gold ornament in the post sale notice. Moreover, that the outstanding dues of the Complainant has been falsely written in the said post sale notice. The O.P. never served any notice prior to auction of gold ornaments. So, it is clear unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P. Due to ill act of the O.P. the Complainant is suffering a huge loss and he is also suffering from mental agony.
Finding no other alternative the complainant filed the instant case before this District Commission praying for an order directing the O.P. to pay Rs. 78,000/- along with interest (if any) and Rs. 50,000/- for unfair trade practice mental agony and loss of business and Rs. 15,000/- for litigation cost.
Defence Case
The O.P. is contesting the case by filing W/V contending inter alia that the case is not maintainable. The specific case of the O.P. is that the gold ornaments given by the Complainant was 20 carat gold and gross weight of the gold ornaments was 26.37 grams but net weight of the ornaments was 24.50 grams and it was agreed by the Complainant and signed the documents and took the loan facility. It is fact that after loan recall notice dated 05.02.2020 and auction notice dated 27.08.2020 and paper publication dated 11.09.2020 finally on 18.09.2020 gold ornaments listed for auction and on that date closing amount of 20 carat gold was Rs. 4301/- and base rate (rounded up) was fixed at Rs. 4087/- (less than 5%) and base rate of auction of gold ornaments was fixed at Rs. 1,00,131.50/- and finally the gold ornaments of the Complainant was sold at his highest bid price of Rs. 1,01,524/- and after adjustment of outstanding loan amount of Rs. 57,976/- including interest and charges as applicable as per the terms of loan transaction documents, an excess amount of Rs. 43,548/- was credited in the account of the Complainant for collection as intimated in the post-sale notice dated 05.11.2020 annexed as “ F ”. The complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed with exemplary cost.
On the basis of the complaint and written version the following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case:
Points for decision
1. Is the Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?
2. Has the OP any deficiency in service, as alleged?
3. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons:
Point no.1
It is coming out from the complaint that the Complainant claims himself to be the consumer of the O.P. The Complainant is not taking steps for long period. Ld. Advocate for the O.P. is present. He has no objection on this point no. 1.
The facts and circumstances suggest that the Complainant is a consumer to the O.P. The point number 1 is thus decided in favour of the Complainant.
Point no.2 & 3
Both the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.
It is specifically alleged by the Complainant in the complaint that he could not repay the loan amount with interest. So, he applied for renewal of the said loan and also requested the O.P. to give some time for repayment of the loan amount. But the O.P. without any due process of law sold the said gold ornaments.
The point to be noted is that the Complainant has not been taking steps for long period and no evidence is adduced on behalf of the Complainant in spite of giving several opportunities to him. However, we perused the relevant portion of the Written Version filed by the O.P. The O.P. has categorically stated in the Written Version that the gold ornaments given by the Complainant was 20 carat gold and gross weight of the gold ornaments was 26.37 grams but net weight of the ornaments was 24.50 grams and it was agreed by the Complainant and signed the documents and took the loan facility. It is fact that after loan recall notice dated 05.02.2020 and auction notice dated 27.08.2020 and paper publication dated 11.09.2020 finally on 18.09.2020 gold ornaments listed for auction and on that date closing amount of 20 carat gold was Rs. 4301/- and base rate (rounded up) was fixed at Rs. 4087/- (less than 5%) and base rate of auction of gold ornaments was fixed at Rs. 1,00,131.50/- and finally the gold ornaments of the Complainant was sold at his highest bid price of Rs. 1,01,524/- and after adjustment of outstanding loan amount of Rs. 57,976/- including interest and charges as applicable as per the terms of loan transaction documents, an excess amount of Rs. 43,548/- was credited in the account of the Complainant for collection as intimated in the post-sale notice dated 05.11.2020 annexed as “ F ”.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case on the basis of the materials on record we find that O.P. sold the said gold ornaments following the due process of law and an excess amount of Rs. 43,548/- was credited in the account of the Complainant for collection.
In view of the matter discussed above we are of the view that instant case is liable to be dismissed on merit.
Reasons for delay
The Case was filed on 07.07.2021 and admitted on 09.08.2021. This Commission tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act, 1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.
In the result, the Consumer case fails.
Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint Case No. CC/30/2021 be and the same is dismissed against O.P. on merit but under the circumstances without any order as to costs.
Let plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand /by post under proper acknowledgment as per rules, for information and necessary action.
The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:
confonet.nic.in
Dictated & corrected by me.
President
Member President.
