IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Friday, the 28th day of October, 2016
Filed on 22.03.2014
Present
- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
- Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member)
in
CC/No.90/2014
between
Complainant:- Opposite parties:-
Smt. Leeniya. R. 1. The Chief Manager, State Bank of
W/o Satheesh Travancore, Zonal Office
Kelakurumbil House Kadappakkada, Quilon – 8
Chathanadu
Avalookkunnu P.O. 2. State Bank of Travancore
Alappuzha – 688 006 District Court Road Branch
(By Adv. V.N. Kiranlal) Alappuzha, Represented by its
Branch Manager
(By Adv. C. Parameswaran)
3. The Tahsildar, Revenue Recovery
Unit, Ambalappuzha Taluk
Alappuzha
O R D E R
SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)
The case of the complainant is as follows:-
The complainant was running a restaurant to eke out her livelihood. While so, in 2007, the opposite parties offered a loan to the complainant. With the result, the complainant availed a loan amount of Rs. 1 lakh from the first and 2nd opposite parties. At the time of releasing the said loan amount, no order of release was delivered to the complainant. On availing the loan amount, the complainant had been regularly making repayments of the said loan amount. In the said manner the complainant repaid nearly an amount of Rs.75,000/- to opposite parties. Yet it appears that the opposite parties willfully have not credited the remitted amount to the material loan account. Notwithstanding repeated requests, the opposite parties were reluctant to issue the loan release order and subsequent statement of account to the complainant. The complainant approached the opposite parties and offered her readiness to make repayment on furnishing the loan release order. The complainant was very much prepared to regularize the material loan account. Strangely yet, the opposite parties were so obstinate not to issue loan release order or to specify on record the rate of interest or EMI. The complainant effected repayments till 28th December, 2013. On the material date the complainant paid an amount of Rs.5000/- to the opposite parties. On the complainant’s insistence a statement of account was issued on the same day wherein the amount of Rs.5000/- remitted did not find a place. Complainant is very much prepared to regularize the material loan account. First opposite party issued a notice calling upon the complainant to turn up for one time settlement in town square. In spite of the complainant’s readiness to effect payments, the opposite parties covered up the material particulars of the said loan and threatened the complainant of recovery proceedings over phone and also through the aforesaid notice. The amount projected in the notice outstanding to be paid to the opposite parties is too exorbitant and without any basis. The complainant is not liable to pay the amount projected in the notice. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, the complaint is filed.
2. The version of the opposite parties 1 and 2 is as follows:-
The complainant was granted a loan of Rs.1 lakh by the 2nd opposite party for her requirements in expanding her business. Complainant committed default in the repayment of loan account. Hence the opposite party had initiated revenue recovery steps and the instant complaint is filed for stalling the said recovery steps. The allegation that the interest charged in the account is more than what is offered is untenable and unsustainable. Bank had initiated the recovery steps against the complainant after repeated notices and reminders. An amount of Rs.5000/- was remitted by the complainant as a condition precedent by way of one time settlement and she did not comply with the terms of settlement by paying the balance amount. Complainant has not sustained any sufferings and mental agony.
3. Complainant has examined as PW1. Documents produced were marked as Exts. A1 to A4. There is no oral or documentary evidence adduced by the opposite parties.
4. The points for consideration are:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) If so the reliefs and costs?
5. It is an admitted fact that complainant was granted a loan of Rs.1 lakh by the 2nd opposite party. According to the complainant even though she made repayment nearly an amount of Rs.75,000/-, the opposite parties willfully having not credited the remitted amount to the material loan account. Opposite party filed version stating that complainant committed default in repaying the loan amount and hence they had initiated revenue recovery steps against the complainant for realizing loan amount. They also stated that an amount of Rs.5,000/- was remitted by the complainant as a condition precedent by way of one time settlement and complainant did not comply the terms of settlement by paying the balance amount. According to the complainant even though had had remitted Rs.5000/- it was not credited into her account by the opposite party. But while cross examining the complainant to the question put by the learned counsel of the opposite party, “28.12.2013-Â 5000/- …....................................?” “ …..........................................................” So it is clear from the deposition of the complainant that the matter was once settled and the complainant failed to comply the terms and conditions of the settlement. It is a settled law that once a matter is settled, party cannot allege deficiency in service by not complying the terms and conditions. In the instant case, the complainant failed to comply the terms and conditions in one time settlement with the opposite party. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
In the result, complaint is dismissed.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me pronounced in open Forum on this the 28th day of October, 2016.
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member)
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Leeniya (Witness)
Ext.A1 - Notice dated 10.10.2013
Ext.A2 - Notice dated 12.3.2014
Ext.A3 - Statement of account
Ext.A4 - Pay-in-slip (in cash) for Rs.5000/-
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.
Compared by:-
Typed by:- pr/-
