J U D G E M E N T
This complaint is filed by the complainant u/S. 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice as the Ops did not take any steps for taking the entire loan amount inspite of showing eagerness by the parties.
1
The brief fact of the case of the complainant is that for earning her livelihood she purchased one Tata Truck by taking financial assistance from the Ops to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000=00, which was repayable by 47 monthly equated installment @Rs. 8460/- per month. The cost of the vehicle was of Rs. 5, 31,529=00. Initially the complainant used to pay the installment regularly on and from 01.01.2011. It was settled that the entire loan amount will be repaid from 01.01.2011 to 01.09.2015. The complainant paid Rs. 1, 86,120=00 i.e. 22 installments out of the entire amount Rs. 1, 86,120, Rs. 1, 20,409=00 were adjusted towards the principal amount and Rs. 65,711/- towards interest. So the complainant is under obligation for making payment of 27 installments upto 31.01.2014, but she could not pay the same due to financial crisis and consequently she decided to foreclose the loan amount by taking financial help from her mother. Accordingly she filed a prayer for settlement through e-mail on 31.01.2014 before the OP with a request to close the loan account subject to payment of Rs. 1, 75,000=00. Further request was made on her behalf of issuance of no due certificate along with other required document i.e. termination of hypothecation endorsement from the registration certificate. In the said e-mail the complainant has stated that the local office of the Op i.e. Op-3 did not receive the settlement proposal of the complainant on the plea that the Op-3 has no system to accept the proposal of settlement in writing. From the copy of e-mail dated 31.01.2014 it will be evident that the complainant has made request to communicate the decision of the Op to her in respect of the proposal of her in writing within 15 days from the date of receipt of the prayer. In response to the prayer of the complainant she was directed to provide complete name filled in the application form, correct loan agreement number, date of birth, accurate EMI amount because the OP could not find the details due to wrong mention of the agreement number. Again the complainant sent the prayer on 02.02.2014 and accordingly the OP stated for further investigation and processing of the request of the complainant, few mandatory information were called for from the complainant through e-mail and the same was provided and upon receipt of the same the OP sent an e-mail on 04.02.2014 intimating the complainant that they have duly received the request of the complainant and the same is under
2
processing. Thereafter on 08.02.2014 the OP through an e-mail instructed the complainant to contact with the local branch for getting clear details of her foreclosure loan account. As per instruction the complainant visited the office of the OP on several occasions, but the OP-3 did not entertain the complainant on the plea that no system to accept proposal for settlement. Being very much aghast and finding no other alternative the complainant again compelled to sent the proposal /prayer for settlement of the loan amount to the OP-2 through e-mail dated 23.02.2014. After receipt of the same the Op-2 informed the complainant on 24.02.2014 that they will respond the same shortly and there is delay due to some essential internal procedure. The OP-2 informed the complainant further through an e-mail on 01.3.2014 that they have done the needful in resolving the query of the complainant. The Op-2 requested the complainant for making payment and closes the loan account along with issuance of NOC. After receipt of the e-mail the complainant made further communication from e-mail dated 03.3.2014 asking for answer to some questions like Whether the offer amount of Rs. 1,75,000=00 is accepted? How many days are required for handing over the NOC and from which the complainant will collect the NOC? The OP-2 acknowledging the receipt communicated with the complainant through an e-mail dated 12.3.2014 that the complainant had to pay a sum of Rs. 2, 00,000=00 towards full and final settlement of the loan account and the same shall be paid on or before 18.3.2014. The complainant was further instructed to contact with the Area Recovery Manager Mr. Raj Kumar Kundu whose address has been mentioned in the said e-mail and the complainant was directed to making prior appointment with him. Upon receipt of the said e-mail she contacted with the Op-2 through e-mail dated 13.3.2014 whereby the Op-2 was informed that after perusing the e-mail of the OP-2 she did not find the word as full and final settlement and no whisper has been made regarding issuance of the NOC along with other documents which are necessary for termination of hypothecation. In the said e-mail the complainant has categorically informed the eagerness and readiness to pay the settlement amount of Rs. 2, 000, 00=00 if the OP received the said amount in writing with an endorsement as full and final settlement of the loan account and the date and time regarding availability of the NOC. Through the
3
e-mail dated 13.3.2014 the complainant intimated Mr. Tanmoy Dey, the then Manager had misbehaved with her, as well as, her representative by using abusive language. Consequently the complainant being compelled contacted with her lawyer. The complainant also informed that she is not eager to pay any amount to the OP-3 without accepting any receipt with an endorsement of full and final settlement of the loan account and requested the OP to give proper advice to the Branch Manager - OP-3. The OP-2 through the e-mail dt. 17.3.2014 asked the complainant for making payment of Rs. 2, 01,530=00 towards full and final settlement on or before 18.3.2014 and also informed to contact with the erstwhile person i.e. Mr. Raj Kumar Kundu. The OP informed the complainant through an e-mail that post-settlement of the loan account and completion of internal procedures the OP- will sent NOC after 15 business days. Upon receipt of the said e-mail she went to the office of OP-3 but could not find out any person, namely, Raj Kumar Kundu till 19.3.2014. Finally on 19.3.12014 the complainant through e-mail requested the OP to provide the mobile number of Mr. Kundu and prayed for extension of time to deposit the settled amount of Rs. 2, 01,530=00 towards full and final settlement of her loan account. But the OP till date of filing of this complaint did not communicate any information against such e-mail. In the meantime one Mr. Rajesh Prasad, the ld. Advocate of the OP by issuing a notice on 26.4.2014 called upon the complainant to attend at the conciliation camp at the office of Mr. Rejesh Prasad at Tollygunge Circular Road on 14.5.2014. The complainant after receipt of the said notice informed the said ld. Advocate over phone about the fact of ongoing process for settlement of the loan account by way of foreclosure. But till this date no final decision of the OP has yet been communicated to the complainant regarding settlement of her loan account by way of foreclosure accepting Rs. 2, 01,530=00. The complainant has filed the petition stating that she is still eager and ready to pay Rs. 2, 01,530=00 towards full and final settlement in respect of her loan account subject to issuance of NOC and other documents necessary for termination of hypothecation endorsement from the registration certificate. It is mentioned that inspite of her readiness the Ops are unnecessarily delaying to communicate the required information and due to non-availability of required information the complainant is not in a position to
4
deposit the amount. Finding no other alternative the complainant has filed this complaint praying for direction upon the Ops to accept Rs. 2, 01,530=00 towards full and final settlement, issuance of NOC and other necessary documents which are required for termination of hypothecation agreement from the registration certificate, Rs. 50,000=00 as compensation due to mental agony and harassment and litigation cost of Rs. 10,000=00.
It is pertinent to mention upon receipt of valid notice from this Ld. Forum the Ops appeared by filing vokalatnama on 15.10.2014 and on that date prayed for time for filing written version. On 13.11.2014 same prayer was made by the Ops. Since then the Ops were absent on calls and chose not to contest this complaint by filing written version. On 06.02.2015 by filing a petition the complainant has prayed for time on the ground that talk of compromise was going on out of Forum, being satisfied with the said petition filed by the complainant this ld. Forum was pleased to fix the complaint on 26.02.2015 for fling settlement petition i.d. argument ex parte against the Ops. As on 26.02.2015 none was present on behalf of the Ops to contest the complaint either orally or through written version, we took up the complaint for hearing and its disposal ex parte against the Ops.
Taking the unrebutted POC it is seen by us that admittedly the complainant purchased one vehicle obtaining loan from the Ops to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000=00 which was repayable by 47 monthly equated installment @Rs. 8,460=00 per month, the cost of the vehicle was of Rs. 5,31,529=00, the balance payment was made by the complainant herself, initially the complainant used to pay monthly installment regularly, she was under obligation for making payment of the entire loan amount along with interest from 01.01.2012 to 01.9.2015, the complainant paid Rs. 1,86,120=00 and Rs. 1,20,409=00 which were adjusted towards the principal amount and paid Rs. 65,711=00 which was adjusted towards interest amount, she paid 27 installments in total up to 31.01.2014, due to financial stringency she could not repay the EMI, consequently she decided to foreclose the loan amount by taking financial assistance from her father, in that connection she made a prayer for settlement with the Ops though e-mail on 31.0.1.2014 with
5
a request to foreclose the loan amount by taking Rs. 1,75,000=00 from her, she has further prayed for issuance of NOC along with other required documents for termination of hypothecation endorsement from the registration certificate. The allegation of the complainant is that though she was agreed for making payment of the entire loan amount along with interest, but till filing of this complaint no step has been taken on behalf of the Ops in respect of foreclosure of the loan account. It is evident from the record that on several dates complainant contact with the Ops through e-mail praying for receipt of the entire loan amount. It is true that written correspondences were made by the OP through e-mail with the complainant and as per direction and request of the OP she contact with the office of the OP-3 who did not entertain her for making payment of any amount towards loan account on the ground that the said office does not enjoy the system of foreclosure. Thereafter the complainant had to run from pillar to post for making payment of the entire loan amount but no result had been yielded. On several occasions the complainant was directed for making payment of Rs. 1,75,000=00 towards the loan amount and thereafter she was directed for making payment of Rs. 2,00,000=00 and at last on 17.3.2014 the OP-2 by sending their e-mail asked the complainant for making payment of Rs. 2,01,530=00 towards full and final settlement on or before 18.3.2014. But since then no fruitful step has been taken by the Ops in respect of foreclosure of the loan account of the complainant. Such inaction on behalf of the Ops reveal that where a customer/consumer is agreed for making repayment of the entire loan amount much prior to the date, hence, why these Ops showed their inability or inaction, no reason had been assigned by the Ops through their e-mail. But it is curious to us that in the case in hand the Ops were reluctant to receipt of any amount from their customer or loanee, of course, the reason is best known to the Ops. But as the complainant has initiated this complaint under compulsion due to such inaction on behalf of the Ops we are to hold that there was certainly deficiency in service on behalf of the Ops. As the Ops were agreed for foreclosure of the loan amount of the complainant by making payment of Rs. 2, 01,530=00 towards full and final settlement and the complainant was also agreed to make payment of the said amount hence, the complainant is hereby directed for making payment
6
of the said amount of Rs. 2, 01,530=00 in respect of the loan account towards full and final settlement. Though the complainant asked for making payment of the afore-mentioned amount on or before 18.3.2014 but we have noticed due to inaction on the part of the Ops the complainant could not pay the said amount and there is several documents that for making payment of the above-mentioned amount as agreed by the Ops, the complainant went to the office of the Ops time and again but to no effect. So during payment of the aforementioned amount the Ops shall not claim any further amount from the complainant. It is pertinent to mention after making payment of the said amount the Ops shall hand over the NOC and some other required documents for termination of hypothecation endorsement from her registration certificate to the complainant positively, otherwise the interest of the complainant will be prejudiced. As the POC being unrebutted we accept the contention as true made out by the complainant. As the complainant inspite of her eagerness and readiness, as well as, direction made by the OP-2 tried to deposit the above-mentioned amount towards full and final settlement, as well as, foreclosure of the loan account, but due to inaction and deficiency in service on the part of the Ops the complainant could not do the same. Being aggrieved with the inaction of the Ops as the complainant has filed this complaint for redressal of her grievance, hence in our view the complainant is entitled to get compensation from the Ops due to harassment and mental agony and as the complainant had to approach before the court of law for redressal of her grievance and incurred some legal expenses, in our view she is also entitled to get litigation cost from the Ops.
Going by the foregoing discussions, hence, it is
O r d e r e d
that the complaint is allowed ex parte against the Ops with cost. The complainant shall make payment to the tune of Rs. 2, 01,530=00 towards full and final settlement of the loan account to the Ops within 30 days from the date of passing of this order and thereafter within 15 days from the date of making of such payment the Ops shall issue the NOC and other required documents for
7
termination of hypothecation endorsement from the registration certificate to the complainant, I. d., the complainant will be at liberty to approach before the executing forum as per provisions of law. Be it mentioned that the Ops shall not claim any further amount from the complainant towards full and final settlement of the loan amount. The Ops are further directed for making payment either jointly or severally a sum of Rs. 3,000=00 as compensation due to prolonged harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs. 1,000=00 to the complainant within 45 days from the date of passing of this order, i.d., the complainant will also be at liberty to put the entire order into execution as per provisions of law. With the above-mentioned observation the complaint is thus disposed of accordingly.
(Asoke Kumar Mandal)
Dictated and corrected by me. President
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Silpi Majumder)
Member
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Silpi Majumder)
Member
DCDRF, Burdwan
