Ld. Advocate(s)
For Complainant: Avijit Banerjee
For OP/OPs : Raja Bhattacharya
(2)
Date of filing of the case :06.08.2021
Date of Disposal of the case : 02.06.2023
Final Order / Judgment dtd.02.06.2023
Complainant above named filed this complaint u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the aforesaid opposite parties praying for order directing the OP to pay Rs.2,00,000/- for harassment, mental pain and agony and cost of the case.
He alleged that he took a gold loan from the OP No.1 vide no.0139/mol/001791 and I.D No. 013910000001549. On 18.04.2020 complainant went before OP NO.1 and found that office was closed due to lock down. On 07.05.2020 complainant again went before the OP NO.1 and tried to deposit the interest against his loan. On that time staff of OP No.1 directed the complainant to deposit interest amounting to Rs.199/- instead of Rs.100/- as complainant has delayed to pay the interest. Thereafter, complainant submitted a petition before OP No.1 and requested him to refund the excess interest but they kept the matter hanging. Complainant served one advocate’s notice dated 04.11.2020 but they did not pay any heed in this regard. Hence the complainant filed this case.
OP NO.1 & 2 contests the case by filing a W/V. They denied entire allegations which has mentioned in the petition of complaint. They further stated that complainant took gold loan amounting to Rs.7,000/- form the OP NO.1 & 2. He had failed to pay the monthly interest from 19.03.2020 to 07.05.2020 the stipulated time as such complainant became defaulter. Due to Covid-19 Pandemic they waived interest for 10 days. Complainant came to pay the interest after the waived period as such complainant was advised to wait for approval of the further waiver of interest from the higher authority but complainant filed this complaint before this Commission. Complainant is duty bound as per the contract to pay the monthly interest to the OPs. They prayed for dismissal of the case.
Trial
During trial complainant filed affidavit in chief. OP No.1&2 filed questionnaire and complainant gave answer.
OP No.1 & 2 did not adduce any evidence.
(3)
Documents
Complainant produced the following documents viz :
- Original Receipt regarding payment of interest amounting to Rs.199/-.........(One sheet)
- Original Receipt amounting to Rs.65/- regarding interest..........(O(ne sheet)
- Xerox copy of complaint issued by complainant dated 04.09.2020..........(One sheet)
- Original Advocate’s letter dated 04.11.2020 issued by Mr. Avijit Banerjee Ld. Advocate..........(Two sheets)
- Original Postal Receipt dated 04.11.2020.........(One sheet)
- Original Track Report............(One sheet)
Brief Notes of Argument
Complainant filed BNA. OP No.1&2 filed BNA.
Decision with Reasons
We have carefully gone through the affidavit in chief filed by the complainant, documents filed by the complainant and BNA filed by the both the parties. We do not find any reason to disbelieve those documents because no objection has been raised against the aforesaid documents. Accordingly, those documents are considered.
It is the allegation of the complainant that monthly interest of the aforesaid loan account was Rs.100/-. On 18.04.2020 was the due date for payment of interest amounting to Rs.100/- but when he went to pay the same before the office of OP NO.1, he found that office was closed. On 07.05.2020, he found that office was opened and when he expressed his desire for making payment of Rs.100/- then staff of OP NO.1 stated that complainant is bound to pay Rs.199/- instead of Rs.100/-.
To get the desired relief, complainant have to show the document from which it can be ascertained that complainant was duty bound to pay Rs.100/- as interest on 18.04.2020.
But on careful perusal of the documents filed by the complainant, we find that complainant did not file any such documents. Accordingly, we are of the firmed view that complainant has failed to established that
(4)
monthly interest of the aforesaid loan account was fixed as Rs.100/-.
Having regard to the aforesaid discussion, we are of the firmed view that complainant has failed to established his grievance by sufficient documents beyond doubt.
In the result present case fails.
Hence,
It is
Ordered
that the present case be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OP NO.1 & 2 but without any order as to costs.
Dictated & corrected by me
............................................
PRESIDENT
(Shri DAMAN PROSAD BISWAS,) ..................... ..........................................
PRESIDENT
(Shri DAMAN PROSAD BISWAS,)
We concur,
........................................ .........................................
MEMBER MEMBER
(NIROD BARAN ROY CHOWDHURY) (MALLIKA SAMADDAR)
