Date of filing : 28.03.2016
Date of order : 11.10.2022
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, VELLORE
PRESENT: THIRU. A. MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM, B.A., B.L. PRESIDENT
THIRU. R. ASGHAR KHAN, B.Sc., B.L. MEMBER – I
SELVI. I. MARIAN RAJAM ANUGRAHA, M.B.A., MEMBER-II
TUESDAY THE 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022
CONSUMER COMPLAINANT NO. 6/2016
L.C. Rekha,
W/o. Anbarasan,
No. 27, 5th Street, Anna Nagar,
Pudur, Vaniyambadi – 635 751,
Vellore District. ...Complainant
-Vs-
The Branch Manager,
State Bank of India,
Vaniyambadi Branch (00252),
Vellore District. ...Opposite party
Counsel for complainant : Thiru. T.S. Kanniyan
Counsel for opposite party : Thiru. K.M. Boopathi
ORDER
THIRU. A. MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM, B.A.,B.L. PRESIDENT
This complaint has been filed Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986. The complainant had prayed this Hon’ble Commission to direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with 12% interest to the complainant from the date of pledging of jewels on 31.07.2012 to the date of payment of the compensation and to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards cost.
1.The case of the complaint is briefly as follows:
The complainant had pledged 3 gold ornaments i.e. one Chain, one Necklace and one Bracelet, totally weighing 184 grams and got an agricultural gold loan of Rs.3,00,000/- from the opposite party. The complainant made payments of Rs.50,000/- on 09.04.2014, Rs.50,000/- on 24.11.2014, Rs.1,00,000/- on 25.06.2015 and Rs.1,00,000/- on 12.11.2015 towards the repayment of the aforesaid loan. Thus the complainant had paid principal amount of Rs.3,00,000/- towards the said loan. The interest amount alone remains to be paid. After paying the fourth installment on 12.11.2015 the bank called the complainant and informed that his jewels were auctioned on 9th month of 2015 itself. Immediately, the complainant sent a complaint to the first opposite party. For which the opposite party sent a reply on 23.11.2015. Thereafter, the complainant sent a complaint to the banking ombudsman on 30.11.2015. The banking ombudsman gave reply on 08.01.2016. The grievance of the complainant is that three perusal notices should have been sent by the opposite party to the complainant before an auction. Whereas only one notice dated 18.08.2015 was sent. Even though, the phone number was available, the bank did not inform to the complainant. Among the three items pledged, the chain is the bigger item and other two items are smaller. If the two smaller items were sold in the auction the sale proceeds would have been sufficient to satisfy the prevailing loan amount as on that date. Whereas the bank had chose to sell the bigger chain. After satisfying the loan amount there was an enormous excess amount of Rs.78,376/- available with the bank. The relevant portion of the letter dated 23.11.2015 is hereby reproduced. “Out of the three gold ornaments pledged two (one chain, and one necklace) weighing 136 grams were auctioned on 22.09.2015 for Rs.2,60,500/-. The remaining ornaments one bracelet weighing 48 grams is in safe deposit will be delivered to you”. But when the complainant approached the bank the bracelet was not available with them and only necklace was given to the complainant from the bank. The market value of the gold as on 22.09.2015 i.e auction date was 2492/- for one gram of gold. But they had sold in auction for Rs.1,915/- per gram only. This clearly shows that the auction purchaser and bank official are hand in glove. The gold loan was closed as early as on 22.09.2015 itself, how the bank accept the payment on 12.11.2015 which means the bank have not at all closed the loan account as on 22.09.2015 as claimed by the opposite party. When the complainant and her husband went to the bank for clarification, they were insulted and intimated and threatened with the help of gun man security. The jewels by the opposite party clearly established that there is a deficiency in service and thereby the opposite party is liable to pay compensation. Hence, this complaint.
2. The written version of opposite party is as follows:
The complainant had pledged three gold ornaments one chain, one necklace and one bracelet totally weighing 184 grams and obtained a loan of Rs.3,00,000/-. On 31.07.2012 is admitted and other payments are also hereby admitted. But it is false to state that she has paid the entire principle amount and net amount alone has to be paid is hereby denied. On 22.09.2015 a sum of Rs.1,83,488/- was in due in the aforesaid loan account. The complainant failed to repay the said amount in spite of repeated demands and request. Further the bank had sent notice on 08.08.2015 through registered post and paper publication also effected 18.09.2015. Later on two items of jewels alone have been auctioned on 22.09.2015 as per the banking norms and sale proceeds of Rs.2,60,500/- have been given credit to her savings bank account. Subsequently the balance amount in the jewel loan account was adjusted and remaining amount was also withdrawn by the complainant. The remaining jewels were taken back by the complainant without any protest. Now the complainant is estopped from questioning the auction taken by the opposite party. Further, the jewels were auctioned openly and it is a public auction. The old jewels could not be auctioned at the market value and only the highest bidding amount, will be taken into account. The auction was conducted according to the bank norms and rules. Further it is false to state that the bracelet was not returned. The bracelet and one chain were sold in auction and necklace was not sold. But while sending the letter by mistake and oversight the description was mentioned as bracelet instead of necklace. Now taking advantage of the clerical error the complainant making false claim which is not sustainable under law. The complainant is a willful defaulter and only to harass the bank she filed the present false complaint and compensation as claimed is highly excessive and opposite party is not liable to pay any compensation. This complaint may be dismissed with cost.
3. Proof affidavit of complainant filed, Ex.A1 to Ex.A9 were marked. Proof affidavit of opposite party filed. Ex.B1 to Ex.B6 were marked. Written arguments of both sides filed. Oral argument of complainant side heard.
4. The points that of arises for consideration are:
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite
party?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for relief as claimed in the complaint?
3. To what relief complainant is entitled to?
5. Point Nos. 1&2: The case of the complainant is that she availed a gold jewel loan of Rs.3,00,000/- on 31.07.2012 by pledging her jewels of three items weighing 184 grams from the opposite party. She has also repaid to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/- on various dates. This fact is not denied by the opposite party. The allegation of the complainant is that, without following the auction procedure, the opposite party sold her gold ornaments by public auction and adjusted the loan amount. This fact only came to the knowledge of the complainant on 12.11.2015. But the complainant herself admitted that she had received a notice from opposite party on 18.08.2015. Her contention is that she has not received any other notice. In fact, the opposite party should have sent three prior notices before selling her jewels in auction. Whereas the opposite party continued the auction since the complainant is a wilful defaulter and as on 22.09.2015 a sum of Rs.1,83,488/- was in due in the aforesaid loan account. Therefore the opposite party sent a notice on 08.08.2015 and a paper publication also were affected on 18.09.2015. Though the opposite party made averments that they have issued the registered post and gave a paper publication prior to the auction, they have not produced the same before this Hon’ble Commission for inspection, to disprove the contention of the complainant. Further they have not specifically stated in this written version that in which newspaper they have published the auction notice. Therefore, we infer that the opposite party did not follow the guideline issued by Reserve Bank of India while auctioning the jewels of the complainant. Therefore, we find that there is a deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence, these Point Nos. 1 and 2 are decided in favour of the complainant.
6. POINT NO.3: As we have decided in Pont Nos.1 and 2 that there is a deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The opposite party is hereby directed to pay Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs and Fifty Thousand only) as compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) towards cost to the complainant. Hence, this point No. 3 is also answered accordingly.
7. In the result, this complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party is hereby directed to pay Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs and Fifty Thousand only) as compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) towards cost to the complainant, within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the above amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of this order to till the date of realization.
Dictated to the steno-typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 11th October 2022.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER –I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT
LIST OF COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:
Ex.A1-09.04.2014 - Bank counter foil for the payment of Rs.50,000/-
Ex.A2-24.11.2014 - Bank counter foil for the payment of Rs.50,000/-
ExA3-25.06.2015 - Bank counter foil for the payment of Rs.1,00,000/-
Ex.A4-12.11.2015 - Bank counter foil for the payment of Rs.1,00,000/-
Ex.A5-08.08.2015 - Copy of intimation letter sent by State bank of India to the
Complainant
Ex.A6-23.11.2015 - Copy of letter sent by the State Bank of India
Ex.A7-30.11.2015 - Copy of Customer Grievance Letter
Ex.A8-08.11.2016 - Copy of letter sent by the Office copy of ombudsman
Ex.A9-12.11.2015 - Copy of letter sent by the complainant to opposite party
LIST OF OPPOSITE PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:
Ex.B1-08.08.2015 - Copy of Notice issued by the Bank
Ex.B2 - Copy of gold loan application along with DPN take delivery letter
Ex.B3 - Copy of auction notice of paper publication
Ex.B4-22.09.2015 - Copy of jewel auction detail
Ex.B5 - Copy of statement of account
Ex.B6 - Copy of statement of account
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER –I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT
