DATE OF FILING : 12.07.2017.
DATE OF S/R : 11.10.2017.
DATE OF ORDER : 09.01.2018.
Priyanka Sanyal,
daughter of Sri Partha Pratim Sanyal,
residing at “Rohini Apartment”, Flat no. C – 2, 3rd floor,
164 Andul Road, P.S. Shibpur,
District Howrah. ………….………………………….……..…… COMPLAINANT.
1. Branch Manager,
India Infoline Finance Ltd.,
Gold Loan Division, 164/2, Andul Road, ( ground floor ),
P.S. A.J.C. Bose Botanic Garden,
Howrah 711103.
2. Sunil Chanda,
Nodal Officer & Customer Care Manager,
India Infoline Fiance Ltd.,
Registered & corporate office 12A – 10, 13th floor,
PARINEE CRESCENZO, C – 38 & 39, G Block,
Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra ( East ),
Mumbai 400051.
3. Sneha Rohra,
Customer Care, India Infoline Finance Ltd.,
Registered & Corporate office 12A- 10, 13th floor,
PARINEE CRESCENZO, C – 38 & 39, G Block,
Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra ( East ),
Mumbai 400051.
4. India Infoline Finance Ltd.,
Registered & Corporate office – 12A – 10, 13th floor,
PARINEE CRESCENZO, C – 38 & 39, G Block,
Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra ( East ),
Mumbai 400051.. ………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
Hon’ble President : Shri Abdul Kuddus.
Hon’ble Member : Shri Sajal Kanti Jana.
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Banani Mohanta ( Ganguli ).
F I N A L O R D E R
The case of the complainant, in short, is that this complainant took loan of Rs. 75,000/- by pledging gold ornaments from o.ps. on 28.02.2017 and a loan account bearing no. GL 7340311 has been allotted by the o.p. no. 1 company in favour of this complainant. On 27.03.2017 this complainant went to the office of o.p. no. 1 to pay interest to the tune of Rs. 1,337/- but o.p. no. 1 refused to issue any money receipt against the payment of interest to o.p. no. 1. Several requests were made to the o.p. no. 1 to issue receipts against payment but they refused to issue any receipt. So this complainant has filed this case and prays for making direction upon the o.ps. to issue money receipt against the payment and also prays for making direction upon the o.ps. to provide account statement of the gold loan and other reliefs.
This case is being contested by the o.ps. by filing written version denying all allegations as made in the petition of complaint contending interalia that the case is not maintainable, no cause of action. There was no unfair trade practice on the part of the o.ps. The specific case of the o.ps. is that as per order of the Government these o.ps. are trying to enforce paperless transaction and avoiding to use papers as such SMS are being sent to the complainant against payment of interest. So this case is liable to be dismissed.
POINTS FOR DETERMINATION :
i) Is the case maintainable in its present form ?
ii) Whether the complainant is a ‘Consumer’ as per provision of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ?
iii) Whether there is any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the o.ps ?
iv) Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
Heard ld. advocate for the complainant. Perused the petition of complaint and the BNA submitted by the parties. It appears that it is not disputed that this complainant took loan amounting to Rs. 75,000/- from o.p. no. 1 by pledging his ornaments and a loan account has been allotted to the complainant to pay interest.The dispute is that these o.ps. are not granting any receipt against payment of interest despite several requests made to the o.ps. On the other hand the o.ps. have taken defence that they are trying to enforce paperless transaction. They are not giving any receipts against payment of interest; but sending SMSs to her mobile. On the other hand, ld. advocate for the complainant argued that the SMSs has got no evidential value and he is also not getting SMSs regularly in his mobile phone. In reply ld. advocate for the o.ps. argued that they are ready to send email if email number is provided by the complainant to them.
In view of above facts and circumstances we are of the opinion that o.ps. are duty bound to grant receipt againstthe payment made by the complainant to them, otherwise, it will not be possible for complainant to prove about payment of interest against the loan as per terms and conditions of the loan agreement.
In view of the facts and circumstances we are of the opinion that non granting of receipt by o.p. against payment can be termed as unfair and deceptive trade practice as well as deficiency in service on the part of o.ps. We like to mention here that the o.ps. cannot discharge their liability in the matter of payment of interest of loan by sending SMS to complainant.
Accordingly we hold that the complainant is able to prove that there is unfair and deceptive trade practice as well as deficiency in service on the part of o.ps.
So we hold that the complainant is entitled to an award in the matter of issuing ofreceipt under signature of the authorized officer of o.p. no. 1 company in the matter of payment ofcase interest or case loan.Complainant is also entitled to statement of his loan account bearing no.GL 7340311. The complainant is not entitled to any relief in respect of other prayers. We also hold that all o.ps. are jointly and severally liable to grant receipts against payment of loan or interest and also to issue statement of loan account to complainants.
In the result, this complaint case succeeds in part.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 228 of 2017 ( HDF 228 of 2017 ) be and the same is hereby allowed on contest against o.ps.
The o.ps. are hereby directed to grant / issue statement of loan account in respect of gold loan account being no. GL 7340311 to complainant which is to be duly authenticated by any officials of o.p. no. 1 company by 15 days from the date of filing of application by complainant in this regard.
The o.ps. are also further directed to grant/ issue receipt against payment of interest or loan received by them from the complainant, under the signature of any authorized person or official of o.p. no. 1 company immediately receipt of same. Prayer for other relief / reliefs as made in petition of complaint by the complainant is / are hereby REJECTED.
If the o.ps. fail to comply with the direction made above then complainant is at liberty to take step with due course of law.
Let a plain copy of the judgment be given to the petitioners, free of costs, and other plain copies also be served upon the o.ps. by registered post / speed post with A.D. as early as possible.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( Abdul Kuddus )
President, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
