Date of filing : 18.08.2009<br /> Date of Order: 30.04.2010<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 30TH DAY OF APRIL 2010<br /> <br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2001 OF 2009<br /> <br /> Mizbha Khanum<br /> No. E.9, Reading Room Street<br /> J.C. Nagar, Bangalore 560 006 Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> 1. CitiFinancial Consumer Finance India Ltd.<br /> Formerly known as Associates India<br /> Financial Services Ltd., No. 3<br /> Local Shopping Complex, Pushp Vihar<br /> New Delhi 110 062<br /> <br /> 2. Citi Finance <br /> Brigade Tower, Brigade Road<br /> Bangalore 560 025 Opposite parties<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed by the complainant stating that she is a software engineer. On 26.06.2008 she had purchased TV, Washing Machine, Refrigerator at Reliance Time Out. Total cost of the same was Rs. 51,680/- for Zero percent interest, EMI for eight months installments. She has made down payment of Rs. 15,440/- and received post dated cheques of Rs. 4,530/- each. Above cheques were never presented by the opposite parties. The complainant submitted that the Citi Financial executives started calling her asking her to come to bank and pay the loan. The complainant kept getting repeated calls from the opposite parties. Opposite parties recovery agents came home and started fighting with the family members. Complainant requested to give back old cheques so that she can issue new cheques. For this recovery agents did not agree and demanded cash. Recovery agents came to house and created a big scene in front of neighbours which humiliated the complainant and her family members. Complainant is not ready to take risk of paying cash to recovery agents. Complainant submitted that they have given enough mental torture due to which she could not concentrate on her CAT exams. On 30.04.2009 she received three notices stating that she is defaulter. In response to notice the complainant visited the address of Mr. K. Babu, Advocate. He was not available at the office. The complainant submitted that she has fed up of harassment of Citi Finance executives. There is no mistake of complainant. The bank statement of complainant shows amount was available. The complainant submitted that she would like to file a case of torture and harassment against Citi Finance because of which she has suffered lot in her life and undergone mental stress and she would like to claim sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- and she is not interested to pay the remaining loan amount. <br /> 2. The opposite party filed defence version stating that complaint is not maintainable. Same is liable to be dismissed. Complaint is false, frivolous, baseless and misconceived. Same is filed with ulterior motive and with malafide intention. Complainant is default in making payment of EMIs and has failed to fulfill the obligations under the loan agreement signed. Complainant has suppressed the facts. Opposite parties deny each and every allegations of the complainant. It has denied that opposite party has harassed complainant in any way. Opposite parties have sent conciliation notices to the complainant in order to amicable settlement. Since, the beginning complainant has not made single payment to the opposite parties. Complainant is not entitled for any compensation. Opposite parties are entitled to get legal dues from the complainant. Therefore, opposite parties requested to dismiss the complaint. <br /> 3. Both parties have filed affidavit evidence and documents.<br /> 4. I have gone through the pleadings of parties, affidavit evidence and documents.<br /> 5. Arguments are heard.<br /> 6. The points for consideration are:<br /> 1. Whether the complaint is maintainable?<br /> 2. Whether the complainant has proved deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties?<br /> 3. Whether the complainant is entitled for relief? <br /> 7. By going through the complaint, the complainant submitted that she would like to file a case of torture and harassment against Citi Finance because she had suffered lot in her life. This type of prayer is not maintainable before this fora. If at all the complainant thought to file a case of torture and harassment this fora is not the proper authority. It is for the complainant to file case for torture and harassment against opposite parties before the police authority. Therefore, this type of complaint is not maintainable before this fora. Secondly, complainant submitted that she has taken loan of Rs. 51,680/- and the monthly EMI of which is Rs. 4,530/-. Whereas, as per the documents produced by the opposite party at annexure D, E, F, she has taken three different loans. First loan is for Rs. 12,690/-. Number of EMIs is 10. Amount of EMI is Rs. 1,269/-. The second loan is also for Rs. 12,690/-. Number of EMIs is 10. Amount of each EMI is Rs. 1,269/- and as per Annexure F, the loan amount is Rs. 22,100/-. Number of EMIs is 10, amount on each EMI is Rs. 2,210/-. The total of three loans EMI comes to Rs. 4,748/-. Whereas the complainant states that the EMI amount is Rs. 4,530/-. This is not correct as per the letter of sanction. The complainant admittedly signed on all the letter of sanction Annexure D, E, F. Therefore, the complainant has not disclosed correct facts. It is the case of the complainant that she had given post dated cheques to the opposite parties. The opposite parties in the affidavit and the version denied having received the post dated cheques. So the burden shifts on the complainant to prove that really she had given eight post dated cheques. Complainant has not produced any documents or evidence to show that she had given 8 cheques to opposite parties. Admittedly, the complainant has not obtained any receipt or acknowledgement from the opposite parties for given post dated cheques. The complainant has not produced counter folio of cheque book to show that she had given 8 post dated cheques to the opposite parties. There is no proof on behalf of the complainant to establish that she had given 8 post dated cheques to the opposite parties. Admittedly, no amount is repaid out of loan amount received by the complainant. It is also admitted case of the complainant that cheques never presented to the bank for encashment. When this is the case there is a considerable force and merit in the defence of the opposite parties that complainant never given post dated cheques. The grievance of the complainant is not in respect of the loan or any kind of deficiency of service rendered by the opposite parties. Her grievance is that recovery agents have harassed her and demanded payment of loan by cash. Therefore, she got enough mental torture due to the harassment of the recovery agents. When this is the case, the complainant could have lodged a police complaint to the concerned police for taking action against opposite parties for harassment and torture. The Hon’ble Supreme Court time and again has warned the financial institutions and banks not to resort to the illegal means for recovery of the loan. The financial institutions and banks are suppose to recover the dues or loan amount legally by following the procedure and rules. If the opposite parties are resorting to illegal means it is for the complainant to file or lodge a police report and the law will take its own course. This forum will not get any jurisdiction to grant compensation to the complainant for harassment and torture. Admittedly, she has no allegation of deficiency of service as regards the transaction is concerned. Therefore, where there is no deficiency of service the question of granting any relief does not arise. Secondly, the RBI had constituted Banking Ombudsman under the banking Ombudsman Scheme 2006 for settlement of the issues between the customer and the banks. If the complainant has got any grievance against opposite party she could have approached the Banking Ombudsman constituted under the guidelines and scheme of RBI. Banking Ombudsman is the proper and correct authority to deal with the complaints of the customers. On this point also the present complaint is not maintainable. Taking any view of the matter the complainant is not entitled for any relief. Therefore, the complaint deserves to be dismissed. In the result I proceed to pass the following:<br /> ORDER<br /> 8. The complaint is dismissed. <br /> 9. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 10. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 30TH DAY OF APRIL 2010. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER<br />