By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,

1. Brief facts:-

Complainant availed loan from opposite party bank for Rs.10,000/- (NHL 387) @ 14¾% interest on 31-5-1995. Later he availed another loan of Rs.9,000/- (NEL 381) @ 16% interest on 29-9-1995. Thus the total loan availed by complainant from opposite party bank is Rs.19,000/- only. Complainant used to make repayments regularly for which opposite party used to issue receipts. That the pass book issued to complainant was kept in the custody of opposite party and opposite party used to make entries in the pass book when complainant made repayments. That on 30-6-2004 after making repayment complainant requested for the pass book. On verification he came to know that he has been cheated. That in the pass book it was seen entered that complainant had availed Rs.19,000/- in two instalments in NEL 381 loan, when actually complainant has received only one instalment of Rs.9,000/- in NEL 381. That as per the pass book the total loan availed by complainant is Rs.29,000/-. That though complainant brought this to the notice of opposite party, opposite party did not take any steps to redress his grievance. Later complainant issued a registered notice to opposite party, but there was no response. Hence this complaint praying to direct opposite party to close the loan by adjusting the amount paid in excess by complainant, to refund any balance and for compensation of Rs.25,000/-.

2. Opposite party filed version specifically denying the allegations in the complaint. It is submitted that on 20-3-1995 complainant applied for housing loan for Rs.35,000/- and loan for construction of wall and iron fencing of Rs.30,000/-. The Bank sanctioned Rs.30,000/- towards loan for renovation of house which is NHL 387. Another loan for fencing and wall construction was also sanctioned for Rs.27,000/- which is NEL 381. The amounts in both loan were to be disbursed in instalments. On 31-5-1995 bank disbursed Rs.10,000/- as loan in NHL 387 vide cheque No.181929 drawn on the Malappuram District Co-operative Bank. On the same day another cheque for Rs.10,000/- was given towards loan of NEL 381 vide cheque No.181933. That complainant has received Rs.20,000/- by cheque on 31-5-1995. Later on 29-9-1995 an amount of Rs.9,000/- was disbursed by cheque towards loan of NEL 381. Thus complainant has availed total loan of Rs.29,000/- and is bound to repay the same with stipulated interest. That when complainant submitted his grievance opposite party had clarified the accounts to complainant showing in all relevant records kept in the bank. That bank has not collected any excess amount. That there has been no fraud error or mistake on the part of opposite party. That there is no deficiency in service and complaint is to be dismissed.

3. Evidence consists of affidavit filed by complainant and Exts.A1 to A7 marked for him. Opposite party filed counter affidavit and Exts.B1 to B11 marked for opposite party.

4. Points for consideration:-

(i) Whether opposite party is deficient in service.

(ii) If so, reliefs and costs.

5. Point (i):-

The limited question that poses for consideration with regard to the question of deficiency in service is what is the total loan amount availed by complainant; whether it is Rs.19,000/- as contended by complainant or whether it is Rs.29,000/- as contended by opposite party. During the pendency of this litigation, complainant remitted all dues to the Bank as per both loan and both the loans were thus closed by opposite party. Since this case was pending the title deeds were not returned to him. Complainant filed I.A.357/08 for return of title deeds. Opposite party did not raise any objection and submitted that all dues to the bank are cleared by complainant. Thus the petition was allowed and complainant has received back the title deeds. Therefore the present prayer as stated in the affidavit is for return of excess amount collected with interest and for compensation of Rs.25,000/-.

6. Admittedly complainant has availed two loans viz., NHL 387, and NEL 381. According to complainant he has received Rs.10,000/- on 31-5-1995 towards NHL 387 and Rs.9,000/- on 29-9-1995 towards NEL 381. That he has not received Rs.10,000/- on 31-5-1995 towards NEL 381. He affirms that on 31-5-1995 he received only one cheque of Rs.10,000/- towards NHL 387 loan.

7. As against this it is submitted by opposite party that on 31-5-1995 complainant was given two cheques of Rs.10,000/- each. One was towards NHL 387 and one was towards NEL 381. That later complainant was given cheque of Rs.9,000/- towards NEL 381 on 29-9-1995. That complainant has been disbursed Rs.29,000/- and has collected all these cheques. That complainant is therefore bound to repay the same.

8. We have to state that the complainant in this case, has not been able to place any reliable evidence before us to substantiate his contention. It is submitted by the counsel for complainant that the two cheques contended to be issued by opposite party on 31-5-1995 are not consecutively numbered cheques and that this would prove the case of the complainant to be probable. Counsel for complainant also drew our attention to an over-writing in Ext.B5 voucher. On perusal of the totality of records we do not find any discrepancies and are unable to rely upon such flimsy grounds. Opposite party relied upon Ext.B3 and B6 documents. Ext.B3 is the loan sanction order (NEL 381) along with terms and conditions of the loan. It is seen in Ext.B3 that complainant has applied for loan of Rs.30,000/-. The amount sanctioned is Rs.27,000/-. As per the terms and conditions this amount is to be disbursed in three instalments of Rs.10,000/-, Rs.9,000/- and Rs.8,000/- each. Ext.B4 is the loan sanction order (NHL 387) with terms and conditions. The amount applied for by the complainant is Rs.30,000/- and the amount sanctioned is Rs.30,000/-. As per the terms and conditions this amount is to be disbursed in three instalments of Rs.10,000/- each. The terms and conditions attached to Ext.B3 and B4 bear the signature of complainant. Ext.B5 is the voucher for issuing cheque No.181927 dated, 31-5-1995 for Rs.10,000/-. Ext.B6 is the voucher for issuing cheque vide No.181933 dated, 31-5-1995. Both these vouchers bear the signature and thumb impression of complainant. From Ext.B5 and B6 it is evident that complainant has received two cheques of Rs.10,000/- each on 31-5-1995. The witnesses who have attested Ext.B5 and B6 are the same. Where as the witness who have attested Ext.B7 voucher for issuance of cheque of Rs.9,000/- on 29-9-1995 are different. We are able to conclude that these documents prove the case put forward by opposite party. In the loan pass book which is Ext.A1 we are not able to find any insertions or discrepancies regarding the entries made. We therefore hold that complainant has failed to establish that he has availed loan of Rs.19,000/- only from opposite party bank. Complainant has not succeeded in establishing a case in his favour.

9. In the result, we dismiss the complaint. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs.

 

Dated this 18th day of December, 2008.

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER

APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A7

Ext.A1 : Pass Book (Nabard Schemes) issued by opposite party to complainant.

Ext.A2 : Photo copy of the letter dated, 19-11-2004 by complainant to

opposite party.

Ext.A3 : Postal receipt.

Ext.A4 : Postal Acknowledgement from opposite party to complainant.

Ext.A5 : Lawyer notice dated, 28-12-2004 by complainant's counsel to

opposite party.

Ext.A6 : Postal receipt.

Ext.A7 : Postal Acknowledgement from opposite party to complainant's counsel.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1 to B11

Ext.B1 : Photo copy of the loan application dated, 20-3-1995 submitted by

complainant to opposite party.

Ext.B2 : Photo copy of the housing loan application dated, 20-3-1995 submitted by

complainant to opposite party.

Ext.B3 : Photo copy of the loan sanctioned order for Rs.27,000/- dated, 06-5-1995

given by opposite party to the complainant.

Ext.B4 : Photo copy of the loan sanctioned order for Rs.30,000/- dated, 06-5-1995

given by opposite party to the complainant.

Ext.B5 : Photo copy of the receipt for Rs.10,000/- dated, 31-5-1995 from complainant

to opposite party(cheque No.181929).

Ext.B6 : Photo copy of the receipt for Rs.10,000/- dated, 31-5-1995 from complainant

to opposite party(cheque No.181933).

Ext.B7 : True Photostat copy of the receipt for Rs.9,000/- dated, 29-9-1995 from complainant to opposite party(cheque No.183133).

Ext.B8 : True Photostat copy of the counterfoil for Rs.10,000/- dated, 31-5-1995

from opposite party to complainant (cheque No.181929).

Ext.B9 : True Photostat copy of the counterfoil for Rs.10,000/- dated, 31-5-1995

from opposite party to complainant(cheque No.181933) .

Ext.B10 : Photo copy of the Certificate of balance NHL 387 (Loan Ledger

Abstract) dated, 19-11-2004.

Ext.B11 : Photo copy of the Certificate of balance NEL 381 (Loan Ledger

Abstract) dated, 26-9-2003.

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER