COMPLAINT FILED ON: 05.10.2010
DISPOSED ON: 21.09.2011
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)
21st SEPTEMBER - 2011
PRESENT :- SRI. B.S. REDDY PRESIDENT
SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER
SRI.M.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER
COMPLAINT NO. 2303/2010
COMPLAINANT | VIJAY KUMAR, S.S.L. Enterprises, No.6, 20th Cross, Cubbonpet, Mysore Bank Circle, Bangalore – 560 002. (Adv: S.Chandrashekaraiah) Vs. |
OPPOSITE PARTY | INDIABULLS FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED, No.201, Gold Coin Towers, 2nd Floor, Residency Road, Bangalore – 560 005. Rep. by its Authorised Signatory. (Adv: B.C.Avinash) |
O R D E R
SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA, MEMBER
This is a Complaint filed U/S. 12 of Consumer Protection Act of 1986, by the complainant, seeking direction to the Opposite party (herein after called as O.P) to return back the original blank cheques, retained for security purpose and to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental harassment and agony and cost on the allegations of deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.
The brief averments made in the complaint are as follows:
2. Complainant has availed loan of Rs.50,000/- vide Loan Account No.S000139866 from O.P. At the time of availing the loan OP has obtained blank cheques from the complainant for security purpose. Complainant made certain payment of Rs.15,000/- & Rs.18,000/- on various dates. The receipts issued by O.Ps, are produced. Due to financial difficulties complainant could not pay some instalments to O.P. Complainant narrated the said facts to O.P. and requested for some time to clear the loan amount. Considering the request of the complainant, OP and complainant arrived for settlement of Rs.50,000/-. As per the offer of settlement and has to pay Rs.50,000/- in two instalments. 1st instalment on or 30/6/2009 Rs.25,000/- and 2nd instalment of Rs.25000/- on or before 31/07/2009. Complainant paid Rs.50,000/- to O.P. on various dates. On 16-09-2009 complainant paid Rs.15,000/-, on 17-8-2009 Rs.10,000/-, on 31-5-2007 Rs.5000/-, on 30-5-2007 a sum of Rs.20,000/-. The receipts issued O.Ps, are produced. After clearing the entire loan amount complainant requested OP to return the original blank cheques issued for security purposes. OP failed to return the same and started demanding excess amount from the complainant. OP started harassing and threatening the complainant that he will file cheque bounce case against the complainant. In spite of repeated request OP failed to return the original blank cheque issued towards security purpose. Complainant felt deficiency in service against O.P. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint against O.P. for the necessary relief.
3. On appearance OP filed the version mainly contending that complainant approached OP with request to advance personal loan of Rs.1,50,000/- in the month of Feb.2007. Copy of the loan application is produced. Considering the repayment capacity of the complainant OP sanctioned personal loan of Rs.1,50,000/- on 12-3-2007 to be repayable in 36 equated monthly installment vide loan account bearing No.S000139866. OP has denied the averment that complainant had availed a loan of Rs.50,000/- only and he had issued a blank cheque as security towards the loan availed by him. As per the terms and condition of the loan sanction, Complainant was required to pay monthly installment on the due date i.e. third of each month commencing from 3-4-2007. But to the contrary in violation of the terms and conditions of the loan agreement. Complainant never cleared his installment on the due date and defaulted as per statement of account dated 27-11-2010. Complainant is still liable to pay out standing balance amount of Rs.65,706/- which is inclusive of pending installment and penal interest. Complainant himself admitted at Para No.4 of his complaint that he has defaulted in repaying the monthly installment. Complainant approached OP requesting for settlement. Considering the Financial position of the complainant. OP offered settlement of loan amount of Rs.50,000/- to be repayable in two equated installments of Rs.25,000/- on or before 30-06-2009 and second installment of Rs.25,000/- to be payable on or before 31-07-2009 and on failure the settlement offer stands cancelled. Complainant is liable to pay the full outstanding balance of his loan account vide settlement offer letter dated:30-06-2009. After giving settlement offer complainant failed to make the settlement amount within the agreed period of time in terms of the offer. Complainant paid Rs.20,000/- cash on 31-09-2009 and another Rs.5000/- by way of cash on the same day i.e. 31-09-2009 and second installment were required to pay on or before 31-07-2009 which complainant has failed, which is clearly evident from the statement of account produced. As a result the settlement offer automatically stands cancelled and complainant is required to pay balance out standing amount of loan account. Complainant being a defaulter who not only failed to clear the installments regularly and also the settlement amount within the time granted cannot knock the doors of this Hon’ble Forum claiming compensation on the alleged grounds of harassment. There is no deficiency in service on the part of O.P. Among other grounds OP prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4. In order to substantiate the complaint averments Complainant filed his affidavit evidence and produced settlement letter of loan account dated:30-6-2009, receipts issued by OP, statement of account extract for the period 1-4-2007 to 12-11-2008. EMI collection receipts 4. On behalf of OP Prasad N. legal officer and power of attorney holder filed affidavit in support of defence version and produced personal loan application form and terms, copy of the demand promissory note, personal loan terms and conditions and copy of the agreement. Both the parties filed written arguments. Heard arguments from both the side.
5. In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this complaint are as under:
Point No.1:- Whether the complainant has proved
the deficiency in service on the part of
the OP ?
Point No.2:- If so, whether the complainant is
entitled for the reliefs now claimed?
Point No.3:- To what Order?
6. Our findings on the above points are:
Point No.1:- In Negative.
Point No.2:- In Negative.
Point No.3:- As per final Order.
R E A S O N S
7. At the out set it is not in dispute that the complainant had availed a loan amount of Rs.1,50,000/- vide loan account bearing No.S000139866 from OP in the month of March 2007 repayable in 36 EMI of Rs.5846/-. Complainant made some payments on various dates. Due to financial difficulties complainant could not pay some installment amounts to O.P. Complainant requested OP to grant some time to clear the loan amount. Hence on 30-06-2009 OP offered one time settlement schedule of Rs.50,000/- repayable in two installments. 1st installment of Rs.25,000/- on or before 30/06/2009 and 2nd installment of Rs.25,000/- on or before 31/07/2009. Complainant paid Rs.15,000/- on 16/09/2009 Rs.10,000/- on 17/8/2009 Rs.5000/- on 31/5/2009 and Rs.20,000/- on 30/5/2009. According to complainant he has paid entire amount as per settlement offer of Rs.50,000/- to OP. The receipts issued by OP are produced. Complainant requested OP to return the blank cheques issued to OP as security for loan amount. OP instead of returning the blank cheques threatened the complainant that he would file a cheque dishonour case against the complainant. In spite of repeated requests OP failed to return the blank cheques to the complainant. Hence complainant felt deficiency in service against OP. Under the circumstances he is approached this forum for necessary relief.
8. As against the case of the complainant the defence of the OP is that complainant has obtained personal loan of Rs.1,50,000/- on 12/3/2007 to be repayable in 36 equated monthly instalments of Rs.5846/- vide loan account bearing No.S000139866. OP has denied the complaint averment that complainant had availed loan of Rs.50,000/- only and he had issued a blank cheque as a security towards the loan availed by him. We have perused the loan application form and other loan documents produced by OP. As per documents loan amount availed by the complainant is Rs.1,50,000/- and not Rs.50,000/- as alleged by the complainant in the complaint. Person who seeks equity must do equity and come with clean hands.
9. Further it is contended by OP that as per the terms and conditions of loan agreement, complainant never cleared his installment cheques on due date and became defaulter. As per statement of account dated 27/11/2010; Complainant is in due of Rs.65,706/- which is inclusive of pending installments and penal interest. In support of its defence OP has produced statement of repayment history. Hence OP offered one time settlement of Rs.50,000/- to be repayable in two equated installments of Rs.25,000/- each, Ist instalment on or before 30th June 2009 and IInd instalment on or before 31st July 2009 and on failure the settlement offer stands cancelled, complainant is liable to pay the full outstanding balance of his loan account. We have perused the settlement offer letter dated:30-6-2009.
10. Further it is contended by OP that complainant has failed to pay entire amount of Rs.50,000/- as per settlement offer. Complainant paid Rs.20,000/- cash on 31/5/2009 and Rs.5,000/- cash on 31/5/2009, Rs.15,000/- on 16/9/2009 and Rs.10,000/- on 17/8/2009 as per the receipts produced by the complainant. As per settlement offer 1st instalment of Rs.25,000/- was to be payable on or before 30th June 2009 and 2nd instalment of Rs.25,000/- was to be payable on or before 31/7/2009. Complainant has failed to pay any of the instalments in the month of June and July 2009. Hence there is some force in the say of the OP. As a result settlement offer stands cancelled and complainant is required to pay the balance outstanding amount along with penal interest as per the loan account. Complainant being a defaulter cannot be allowed to allege deficiency in service against OP. Complaint is devoid of merits. Complainant failed to prove the deficiency in service against OP. Under the circumstances we are of the considered view that complainant is not entitled for any of the reliefs claimed. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following
O R D E R
The complaint is dismissed. Considering the nature of dispute there is no order as to costs.
Send the copy of this order both the parties free of cost.
(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 21st day of September 2011.)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Rk.
