Karnataka

Kolar

CC/59/2018

Alabakash - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager, - Opp.Party(s)

K.Narendra Babu

19 Nov 2018

ORDER

Date of Filing: 11/07/2018

Date of Order: 19/11/2018

BEFORE THE KOLAR DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, D.C. OFFICE PREMISES, KOLAR.

 

Dated: 19^th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018

PRESENT

SRI. K.N. LAKSHMINARAYANA, B.Sc., LLB., PRESIDENT

SMT. A.C. LALITHA, BAL, LLB.,  ……  LADY MEMBER

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 59 OF 2018

Alabakash,

Jum Jum Ladies Tailor,

Aged About 38 Years,

S/o. Late Mohammed Ghouse,

1^st Cross, Gowripet, Near Masjid,

Near Post Office,

Kolar.                                                  

(Rep. by Sri. K. Narendra Babu, Advocate)                             ….  COMPLAINANT.

 

- V/s –

1) The Branch Manager,

The Pavaghada Souharda Multipurpose

Co-operative Limited,

#3, 1^st Floor, M.G. Road, Kolar.

(Rep. by Sri. C.M. Niranjana Swamy, Advocate)

 

2) Managing Director,

The Pavaghada Souharda Multipurpose

Co-operative Limited,

#264, 1^st Main Road, 1^st Cross,

Bharathi Layout, Suddhaguntepalya,

Bangalore-560 029.

(Rep. by Sri. C.M. Niranjana Swamy, Advocate)               …. OPPOSITE PARTIES.

 

-: ORDER:-

BY SRI. K.N. LAKSHMINARAYANA, PRESIDENT,

01.   The complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite parties and prays to direct the Ops to pay Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation and to give sufficient time to the complainant for repayment of the outstanding loan amount of Rs.19,200/- i.e., Rs.200/- per day (on daily basis) and to return eight post-dated cheques issued by the complainant at the time of availing the loans from the OP No.1 in the interest of justice.

 

02.   The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that, he is running ladies tailoring shop at the address given in the cause-title.  About one year back the representatives of the Ops came to his tailoring shop and stated that, they will provide personal cash loan for improvement of business and to develop the shop, the repayment of the loan shall be made in hundred days of equal installment on every day and in the weekly holidays and when on out of station, the complainant would pay the said installment on the very next day and for sanction of the loan the complainant has to give two blank cheques and demanded to get the loan and took the complainant to the OP No.1 office and given personal cash loan of Rs.20,000/- without getting the cheques by taking signature to the application form and other documents.  The repay of the said loan in 100 days of Rs.200/- on each day.  The complainant has to pay the installment to the representatives of the OP and they issued one small book for entry of repayment of installments.  The representatives of the OP collected a sum of Rs.200/- on every day and noted the same in the said small book.  The representatives of the OPs insisted for the cheques and after five days the complainant himself personally went to OP No.1 office given two blank cheques of United Bank of India, Kolar Branch, bearing Nos. 263751 and 263752.  After some days likewise the representatives of the Ops took the complainant saying that, OP called him and without consulting the OP No.1 took his signature on many documents and to the application form and OP No.1 given cash personal loan of Rs.27,000/- out of Rs.50,000/- by deducting the earlier loan amount and the complainant has to repay the said amount in 100 days of equal installment of Rs.500/- per day, though the complainant is not at all interested in taking the said loan and asked to tear-off the documents signed by him and OP No.1 forced him to take the said loan as it will help them and they will not bother for delay in the repayment and they will not disturb him and give two blank cheque to our representatives when the collecting the installment amount.  On the pressure of OP No.1 he took the said loan amount and the small book.  And thereafter the complainant himself went to Ops office and given 02 blank cheque of the said Bank bearing Nos. 263753 and 263754 to OP No.1.  And thereafter likewise after lapse of some days the representatives of the Ops took the complainant to OP No.1 office though the complainant is not at all interested in taking the loan and though refused to take loan they took his signature to the documents and on the application form and gave cash personal loan of Rs.35,000/- and given a sum of Rs.2,500/- by deducting the earlier loan and repay the said amount in 100 days of equal installments of Rs.350/- per day and given small book and at the time of collecting the installments the representatives of the Bank insisted the complainant to give two cheques as security and the complainant went to OP No.1 office personally and given two blank cheques of the said bank bearing cheque Nos.263755 and 263756 and at that time they demanded two more cheque for the security and the complainant given two blank cheques of the said bank bearing Nos.263757 and 263758 and in all there are eight blank cheques with the OPs.  The complainant paid the installment of Rs.350/- till 09.05.2018 and the representatives of the OP No.1 insisted the complainant to pay more amount towards installment and they will sanction loan of Rs.50,000/- by deducting earlier loan.  The complainant has paid the installment of Rs.1,000/-, Rs.700/-, Rs.500/- to get loan for his children education.  On 29.05.2018 the complainant went to OP No.1 office and asked for loan of Rs.50,000/- by deducting the earlier outstanding loan for the purpose of his children education, but the OP No.1 has refused to sanction the loan and the complainant insisted to pay the arrears of the full outstanding loan amount of Rs.35,000/- to get the loan. The complainant could not repay the installment amount for one month and thereafter as usual paying the installment amount of Rs.350/-.  The representatives of OP No.1 did not come to the shop to receive the installment amount and the Ops have also not at all given any notice to that effect.  On 18.06.2018 the representatives of the Ops suddenly came to the complainant and stated that, the notice has been served and you have to pay balance of Rs.19,200/- and you have to pay the said amount within seven days otherwise legal action will be taken according to law and he replied that, the said seven days is not sufficient to clear the loan amount and he will pay the installment regularly and asked to sanction loan of Rs.50,000/- by deducting Rs.19,200/- and give the remaining amount and he will pay the installments regularly.  The Ops threatened the complainant to pay the said balance amount within seven days.  Thereafter the complainant has issued legal notice against the Ops on 02.07.2018.  The Ops also replied the said notice on 05.07.2018 and the same has been posted on 07.07.2018 and he received the same on 16.07.2018 and there is no any balance amount payable to the Pavagada Souharda Multipurpose Co-operative Limited and prays to allow the complaint.

 

03.   The complainant has filed following documents:-

(i) Small book issued by OP No.1 pertaining to entry of payment of installment.

(ii) Notice No.1 issued by OP

(iii) Office Copy of the Notice issued by complainant to OP

(iv) Notice No.2 issued by OP.

(v) Xerox copy of the Payment list to the workers

(vi) Xerox copy of the measurement book

 

04.   The OP No.1 has filed its version and the counsel for OP No.2 has filed Memo to adopt the version of OP No.1.  The OP No.1 has specifically denied the entire averments made in Para-2 to 24 of the complaint as false and specifically contended about the facts of the case that, on 25.03.2018 the complainant has borrowed loan of Rs.35,000/- from OP No.1 and the said loan is to be cleared within 100 days.  The complainant at the time of borrowing loan has agreed to pay Rs.350/- per day and has violated the same without paying the installment.  The complainant has issued legal notice through his counsel to the OP.  The complainant is not a consumer as per Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and the complaint will not stand and prays to dismiss the said complaint.

 

05.   The complainant has filed affidavit evidence by way of examination-in-chief.  One Sri. T.L. Ramakrishna, the Manager of OP No.1 has filed affidavit evidence by way of examination-in-chief.  Heard arguments on both sides.

 

06.   Now the points that do arise for our consideration are that:-

POINT NO.1:- Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of Ops?

 

POINT NO.2:-   Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief as prayed by him in the complaint?

 

POINT NO.3:-   What order?

 

07.   Our findings on the above points are that:-

POINT NO.1 & 2:-    Are in the Negative

POINT NO.3:-   As per the final order

                                        for the following:-

 

 

REASONS

08.   POINT NOS.1 & 2:-  These points are taken up together for discussion to avoid repetition of facts and reasonings.  .  We have perused the complaint, version filed by OP No.1, affidavit evidence of complainant and the OP No.1 and the documents produced by the complainant.  The counsel for the complainant addressed arguments to allow the complaint as prayed.  The counsel for the OP No.1 has addressed the arguments and prays to dismiss the complaint as not maintainable.

 

09.   At the out-set it is relevant to narrate about the facts of the case that, about one year back the representatives of the Ops came to his tailoring shop and stated that, they will provide personal cash loan for improvement of business and to develop the shop, the repayment of the loan shall be made in hundred days of equal installment on every day and in the weekly holidays and when on out of station, the complainant would pay the said installment on the very next day and for sanction of the loan the complainant has to give two blank cheques and demanded to get the loan and took the complainant to the OP No.1 office and given personal cash loan of Rs.20,000/- without getting the cheques by taking signature to the application form and other documents and the repay of the said loan in 100 days of Rs.200/- on each day.  The complainant has to pay the installment to the representatives of the OP and they issued one small book for entry of repayment of installments.  The representatives of the OP collected a sum of Rs.200/- on every day and noted the same in the said small book.  The representatives of the OPs insisted for the cheques and after five days the complainant himself personally went to OP No.1 office given two blank cheques of United Bank of India, Kolar Branch, bearing Nos. 263751 and 263752.  After some days likewise the representatives of the Ops took the complainant saying that, OP called him and without consulting the OP No.1 took his signature on many documents and to the application form and OP No.1 given cash personal loan of Rs.27,000/- out of Rs.50,000/- by deducting the earlier loan amount and the complainant has to repay the said amount in 100 days of equal installment of Rs.500/- per day, though the complainant is not at all interested in taking the said loan and asked to tear-off the documents signed by him and OP No.1 forced him to take the said loan as it will help them and they will not bother for delay in the repayment and they will not disturb him and give two blank cheque to our representatives when the collecting the installment amount.  On the pressure of OP No.1 he took the said loan amount and the small book.  And thereafter the complainant himself went to Ops office and given 02 blank cheque of the said Bank bearing Nos. 263753 and 263754 to OP No.1.  And thereafter likewise after lapse of some days the representatives of the Ops took the complainant to OP No.1 office though the complainant is not at all interested in taking the loan and though refused to take loan, they took his signature to the documents and on the application form and gave cash personal loan of Rs.35,000/-.  The said contention of the complainant is denied by the OP as false except the personal loan of Rs.35,000/-.

 

10.   On perusal of the above said contention of the complainant it does not disclose any specific date for approaching the complainant by the representatives of OPs as alleged by the complainant.  The complainant has made allegations against the representatives of the OPs in taking loan, but the complainant has not at all made those representatives of OPs as parties to the proceedings to support the said contention of the complainant.  Further on perusal of the Xerox copies of the documents produced by the complainant with respect to said alleged cash loans it also does not disclose about any date, hence the above said contention of the complainant is goes in vain as it does not support any documentary evidence and the said contention of the complainant cannot be taken in to consideration as the complainant has failed to prove the said alleged contention.

 

11.   The OP has specifically taken up the contention that, the complainant has borrowed loan of Rs.35,000/- on 25.03.2018 and repayment of the said loan is on daily basis installment of 100 day of Rs.350/- each day and to that effect the complainant has produced a small book bearing SLDR Account No.11/2018.  On perusal of the said account book bearing No.11/018 it discloses about balance loan of Rs.19,200/- and repaying the said loan on installment basis as contended by the parties and on perusal of the said account book it reveals about balance loan of Rs.19,200/- and   the OP No.1 has to recover the said balance loan amount only on daily basis.  The complainant is bound to repay the said balance loan amount of Rs.19,200/- on daily basis as agreed between the complainant and the OP No.1.  However it is the bounden duty of the complainant to repay the said amount on daily basis as agreed between the parties to take fresh loan and in this regard this Forum cannot interfere and the direction cannot be given as prayed by the complainant.  On perusal of the entire complaint it does not make out the fact of consumer as contemplated Under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, hence the complainant is not a Consumer as contemplated Under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

12.   Hence under these circumstances as discussed above the complainant has not made out any case of deficiency of service on the part of the Ops and the complainant is not entitled for any reliefs as prayed by him and accordingly we answer point Nos.1 & 2 are in the Negative.

 

POINT (3):-

13.   In view of the above discussions on Point (1) & (2) we proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

01.   The complaint filed by the complainant is dismissed.  No order as to costs.

02.   Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us on this 19^th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018)

 

 

 

LADY MEMBER                                PRESIDENT