KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL NO:858/2002 JUDGMENT DATED:24..11..2008. PRESENT SRI.M.V.. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER SRI.S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR : MEMBER 1.Managing Director, Kerala State Fiancial Enterprises, Thrissur. 2.Branch Manager, Kerala State Financial Enterprises, Kadappakkada Branch, Kollam. : APPELLANTS 3.Regional Manager, Regional Office, Kerala State Financial Enterprises, Chinnakkada, Kollam. (By Adv: Sri.P.K.Venugopal & S.Pradeep) V. G.Balachandran, Leelalayam, Thevally, Kollam. : RESPONDENT (By Adv: Sri.S. Reghukumar) JUDGMENT SHRI.M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated:15th November 2002 passed by CDRF, Kollam in OP:367/2001. The complaint in the said OP was filed by the respondent herein as complainant against the appellants as opposite parties claiming refund of the excess amount of Rs.67.233/- with 18% interest and compensation of Rs.20,000/- with cost of Rs.5000/-. The opposite party/KSFE entered appearance and contended that no amount was collected in excess and they have collected only the amount which was due to the KSFE with the penal interest as agreed upon by the parties. But the Forum below accepted the case of the complainant to some extent and thereby passed the impugned order directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.33,334/- with 12% interest from the date of the complaint till realization with compensation of Rs.1000/-. Aggrieved by the said order the present appeal is filed by the opposite parties in OP:367/01. 2. We heard both sides. Learned counsel for the appellants/opposite parties submitted his arguments based on the grounds urged in the Memorandum of the present appeal. He pointed out the fact that the complainant remitted 13 instalments with the over due interest by 6..4..2000 and thereafter 23 instalments were due from the complainant on the due date ie, 15..4..2001. It is further submitted that they calculated the defaulted instalments and interest at the rate of 18% as penal interest and the same was levied based on the agreement entered into between the parties. Thus, the appellants prayed for setting the aside the impugned order passed by the Forum below. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent/complainant much relied on Ext.P3 Revenue Recovery notice and submitted that as on 28..2..2001 the total instalment amount due to the KSFE was only Rs.1,66,946/- and interest thereon. Thus the appellant supported the findings and conclusions of the Forum below and requested for dismissal of the present appeal. 3, The points that arise for consideration are:- 1. Whether there occurred any deficiency of service on the part of the appellants/opposite parties in collecting the amount by virtue of Ext.P1(f) Chalan on the date of closure of the loan account ie, on 7..3..2001? 2. Whether the case of the respondent/complainant that a sum of Rs.67,233/- was collected by the opposite party as excess amount can be accepted? 3. Whether the Forum below can be justified in directing the appellants/opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.33,334/- with 12% interest and compensation of Rs.1000/-? 4. Is there any sustainable ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Forum below in OP:367/01? 4. Point Nos:1 to 4:- The fact that the respondent/complainant availed a loan of Rs.1,87,000/- from the opposite party/KSFE under house modernizing scheme and the complainant entered into an agreement with the opposite party for that purpose. Admittedly the loan amount had to be repaid in 36 equal monthly instalments of Rs.7260/- and the due date of the said loan transaction was 15..4..2001. The materials on record would make it clear that the complainant was not prompt in remitting the instalments as agreed. It is evidenced by Ext.P1 series of chalans. It is admitted by both sides that on 6..4..2000 the complainant had remitted 13 instalments with the over due interest and thereafter 23 instalments were to be remitted by the complainant. It is as per P3 RR notice the opposite party/KSFE demanded the instalments with penal interest at the rate of 18% per annum. On getting P3 notice the complainant closed the loan transaction on 7..3..2001. Thus, there was a premature closure of the loan transaction as he remitted the amount on 7..3..2001 instead of 15..4..2001. 5. There can be no doubt that the 14th instalment ought to have been remitted on 15..6..1999 but it was remitted only on 7..3..2001. There was delay of 21 months likewise 15th instalment was delayed by 20 months, 16th by 19 months. If we go on calculating the delay in remitting the instalments there will be delay of 231 months. The opposite party/KSFE claimed 18% interest on the said instalment of Rs.7,260/- for a period of 231 months. So the interest would come to Rs.25,171/-. If we go by that calculation the amount calculated and levied by P1(f) chalan is only just and proper. There cannot be any excess collection of interest or penal interest by the opposite party. 6. It is admitted by both sides that after the closure of the loan transaction on 7..3..2001 a sum of Rs.4,446/- has been refunded to the complainant because of the clerical mistake crept into the calculation. 7. P1 series of chalans would show that the complainant had remitted 9 instalments (1 to 9) by chalans marked as P1(a), P1(b) and P1(c). But there occurred some mistake in issuing the chalan by the cashier. Thereafter, as per P1(d) chalan a sum of Rs.2,885/- has also been collected towards the 9th instalment. But as per P1(a), (b) and (c) chalans the complainant had remitted instalments 1 to 9. There was no need to make a further payment of Rs.2885/- by virtue of P1(d) chalan. Thus, the complainant is entitled to get the said amount refunded. So, the opposite party is liable to refund the said sum of Rs.2,885/- to the complainant. 8. The correspondence between the complainant and the opposite parties would make it clear that the complainant was bound to pay penal interest at 18% on the defaulted amount. It is also to be noted that the complainant has no case that the rate of interest on the defaulted amount would not come to 18%. The opposite party/KSEF is justified in levying penal interest at 18% per annum on defaulted instalments. In D7 letter dated:12..6..2001, the Branch Manager of the opposite party/KSFE had made it clear that they have only collected penal interest at the rate of 18% per annum. The other claim made by the complainant regarding the interest concession of 25% on premature closure cannot be accepted. The P2 advertisement notice produced by the complainant would make it clear that he is not entitled for such a concession. It can very safely be concluded that the complainant is only entitled to get refund of Rs.2,885/- which was collected by the opposite party/KSFE as per P1(d) chalan dated:6..4..2000. 9. The Forum below has gone wrong in appreciating the entire facts, circumstances and evidence on record and has also gone wrong in calculating the actual amount due from the complainant. We have no hesitation to setaside the impugned order passed by the Forum below. Thereby the impugned order directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.33,334/- to the complainant with 12% interest is set aside. At the same time the opposite parties are directed to refund the excess amount of Rs.2885/- collected from the complainant on 6..4..2000 and the said amount will carry interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 6..4..2000 till the date of payment/realization. The fact that the complainant was a chronic defaulter in making payment of the instalments. There cannot be any order to pay compensation to the complainant. Both the parties are directed to suffer their respective costs throughout. The order directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.1000/- as compensation is also cancelled. These points are answered accordingly. In the result the appeal is allowed partly. The impugned order dated:15..11..2002 passed by CDRF, Kollam in OP:367/01 is set aside/modified. Thereby the appellants/opposite parties are directed to refund the excess amount of Rs.2,885/- collected by them from the complainant on 6..4..2000. The said amount will carry interest at 18% per annum from 6..4..2000 to the date of payment/realization. There will be no order as to compensation or cost. M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR : MEMBER VL. | 
