Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/94/2008

Mr. R.Ganapathy - Complainant(s)

Versus

LIC Finance Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

K.Perumal

07 Jun 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 26.02.2008

                                                                          Date of Order : 07.06.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                : MEMBER-I

 

C.C. No.94 /2008

DATED THIS THURSDAY THE 07^th DAY OF JUNE 2018

                                 

Mr. R. Ganapathy,

S/o. Mr. V. Ramasamy Pillai,

No.13/4, Kaliamman Koil Street,

Anuppanady,

Madurai – 9.                                                                 .. Complainant.                                                         ..Versus..

 

1. LIC Housing Finance Limited,

Represented by its Regional Manager,

No.30/1A, Abdul Razak 1^st Street,

Saidapet,

Chennai – 600 015.

 

2.  The Authorised Officer,

LIC Housing Finance Ltd.,

No.30/1A, Abdul Razak 1^st Street,

Saidapet,

Chennai – 600 015.

 

3. Mr. Murali,

Dy Manager,

LIC Housing Finance Ltd.,

No.30/1A, Abdul Razak 1^st Street,

Saidapet,

Chennai – 600 015.

 

4. Mr. Vijayarajan,

Recovery Dept.,

LIC Housing Finance Ltd.,

No.30/1A, Abdul Razak 1^st Street,

Saidapet,

Chennai – 600 015.

 

 

5. Mr. Purushothaman,

Recovery Dept.,

LIC Housing Finance Ltd.,

No.30/1A, Abdul Razak 1^st Street,

Saidapet,

Chennai – 600 015.                                             ..  Opposite parties.

          

Counsel for complainant           :  Mr. K. Perumal & another

Counsel for opposite parties    :  M/s. Ramalingam Associates

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to pay a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- towards compensation for loss of reputation, damages for the mental agony, hardship undergone due to the careless and negligent act and pay the cost of the complaint.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

The complainant and his wife availed a Housing Loan from the 1^st opposite party.  The complainant and his wife are the Government servants availed a Housing Loan for purchasing ready built house.   For certain period, they have paid the instalments properly and thereafter, due to misunderstanding between the complainant and his wife, the instalments were not properly paid since they lived separately and stopped the payment of EMI.  The complainant also shifted his residence from Chennai to Madurai.  During the relevant period, the complainant submits that he was suffered from “Late Onset of Seixures”.  The complainant duly informed the said ailments and shifting of residence to the opposite parties.   On the other hand, the opposite party sent letters to the complainant at Madurai address.  But the complainant submits that, the opposite parties after knowing that there is a Matrimonial disharmony between the complainant and his wife sent letters to Rajasthan where his wife resides.  Further the complainant submits that, while he was under treatment , the opposite parties break open the locks of the house mortgaged towards the loan, locked and sealed the house after damaging several items inside the house.   The opposite party sent legal notice dated:15.07.2003 to the complainant.  The complainant submits that even the opposite party knowing fully well that the complainant is residing at Madurai and taking treatment, locking and sealing and auction sale of proper under SARFAESI Act amount to deficiency in service.   The publication has not been made at the Madurai address or copy of publication given to the complainant.   While so, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.5,02,964/- by way of Demand Draft dated:16.10.2006 & 13.11.2006 drawn on Oriental bank for Rs.1,00,000/- & Rs.1,52,964/- and on 13.11.2006 by Demand Draft drawn on ICICI bank for a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- and settled the entire dues.

2.     Further the complainant submits that, he made a complaint before LIC Ombudsman and demanded to handover possession of the property after delocking.  At that time, the 2^nd opposite party demanded the complainant to issue ‘No Due Certificate’.  Since the complainant refused to give ‘No Due Certificate’ after payment of entire loan amount and closing the loan, the opposite party refused to give possession of the house and once again locked the house by the personal lock of the 2^nd opposite party and sealed the house without any authority under law or under SARFAESI Act.  Thereafter, the complainant issued letters and taken possession of the property in a damaged condition of wall and articles including missing several articles.   The act of the opposite parties leads to hardship and mental agony.    Hence the complaint is filed.

3.     The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite parties is as follows:

The opposite parties specifically deny each and every allegations made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The opposite parties state that, the complainant is neither  a Consumer nor the opposite parties rendered any service to the complainant for a consideration.  Hence the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts.   The complainant availed a loan from the opposite party and the opposite party took possession of the property for non-payment of loan.  Further the opposite party states that, the loan is sanctioned in favour of the complainant and his wife one Mrs. Punitha Ganapathy for purchasing a house.  The complainant and his wife has to pay the loan amount of Rs.3,899/- per month with interest at the rate of 16.50 p.a. for 240 instalments.   Since the complainant and his wife defaulted in payment of EMI the opposite parties initiated proceedings under SARFAESI Act and issued notice u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act.  Due publication in ‘News Today’ and Malai Sudar” on 25.06.2006 also given and took physical possession of the property on 25.08.2006.  Further the opposite parties state that, the complainant paid the entire amount by way of a Demand Draft and was accepted by the opposite party and dropped the auction sale and came forward to delock the property and redelivered the property to the complainant and the complainant also acknowledged the delivery.  After the entire issue was over the complainant has filed this complaint.  Therefore there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  Hence the compliant is liable to be dismissed. 

4.   In order to prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A33 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties filed and documents Ex.B1 to Ex.B7 are marked on the side of the opposite parties as their evidence.

5.     The point for consideration is:-

Whether the complainant is entitled a compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- for loss of reputation, mental agony and deficiency in service of the opposite parties with cost as prayed for?

6.     On point:-

Both parties has not filed any written arguments.  Heard the opposite party’s Counsel.  The complainant has not turned up to advance any oral argument also.  Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavits, documents etc.   Admittedly, the complainant and his wife availed a Housing Loan from the 1^st opposite party.  The complainant and his wife are the Government servants availed a Housing Loan for purchasing ready built house.   For certain period, they have paid the instalments properly and thereafter, due to misunderstanding between the complainant and his wife, the instalments were not properly paid since they lived separately and stopped the payment of EMI.  The complainant also shifted his residence from Chennai to Madurai.  During the relevant period, the complainant contended that he was suffered from “Late Onset of Seixures” vide Ex.A24, Medical Certificate.    The complainant duly informed the said ailments and shifting of residence to the opposite parties.   But no record was found.  On the other hand, on a careful perusal of Ex.A3, it is seen that the opposite party sent letters to the complainant at Madurai address.  The complainant’s wife is alleged to be living in Rajasthan and her where abouts are not known.  But the complainant pleaded that, the opposite parties sent letters to Rajasthan. 

7.     Further the complainant pleaded and contended that, while he was under treatment , the opposite parties break open the locks of the house mortgaged towards the loan, locked and sealed the house after damaging several articles inside the house.  But the complainant has not produced any list of articles either damaged or found missing.    It is admitted by the complainant that before locking and sealing, the opposite party issued letters demanding to pay the EMIs related to housing Loan.  At long last, the opposite party sent legal notice Ex.A2 dated:15.07.2003 to the complainant. Ex.A1 to Ex.A9 are the letters and notice.  The contention of the complainant is that even the opposite party knowing fully well that the complainant is residing at Madurai and taking treatment for locking and sealing and auction sale of property under SARFAESI Act; the publication has not been made at the Madurai address or copy of publication given to the complainant.   While so, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.5,02,964/- by way of Demand Draft dated:16.10.2006 & 13.11.2006 drawn on Oriental bank for Rs.1,00,000/- & Rs.1,52,964/- and on 13.11.2006 by Demand Draft drawn on ICICI bank for a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- and settled the entire dues. But the opposite party has not issued any receipts for such amount even after receiving the same except issuing letter dated:27.11.2006 Ex.A25 stating that:

“We are happy to note that the first of you has paid the entire dues towards closure of the above loan account in terms of the settlement.  We hereby confirm that the above said loan account stands closed and the mortgage is discharged.  We have no further claim against both of you in the said loan account”.

proves the deficiency in service  in acknowledgement of amount.

8.     Further the complainant pleaded and contended that, he made a complaint before LIC Ombudsman and demanded to handover possession of the property after delocking.  At that time, the 2^nd opposite party demanded the complainant to issue ‘No Due Certificate’ from the complainant.  Since the complainant refused to give ‘No Due Certificate’ after payment of entire loan amount and closing the loan, the opposite party refused to give possession of the house and once again locked the house by the personal lock of the 2^nd opposite party and sealed the house without any authority under law or under SARFAESI Act amounts to unfair trade practice.  Thereafter, the complainant under compelling circumstances issued letters Ex.B6 & Ex.B7 and taken possession of the property in a damaged condition of wall and articles including missing of several articles and filed this case before this Forum claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- for such mental agony and the deficiency in service, unfair trade practice exercised by the opposite party.

9.     The contention of the opposite party is that, the complainant is neither  a Consumer nor the opposite parties rendered any service to the complainant for a consideration.  Hence the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts is not acceptable because  admittedly, the complainant availed housing loan from the opposite party and the opposite party took possession of the property for non-payment of loan.   Further the contention of the opposite party is that, admittedly, the loan is sanctioned in favour of the complainant and his wife one Mrs. Punitha Ganapathy for purchasing a house as per Ex.B1.  The complainant and his wife has to pay the loan amount of Rs.3,899/- per month with interest at the rate of 16.50 p.a. for 240 instalments.   Since the complainant and his wife defaulted in payment of EMI the opposite parties initiated proceedings under SARFAESI Act and issued notice u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act as per Ex.A12 .  Due  publication in ‘News Today’ and Malai Sudar” on 25.06.2006 also given vide Ex.B2 to Ex.B5 and took physical possession of the property on 25.08.2006.   But on a careful perusal of records, all the publication were done only at Chennai knowing fully well that the complainant is residing at Madurai and his wife is residing at Rajasthan.   The opposite party has not produced any document  to prove that neither the publication copy nor the notice issued under the SARFAESI Act served / issued to the complainant in the Madurai address proves the deficiency in service.  Further the contention of the opposite parties is that, the complainant paid entire amount by way of a Demand Draft and was accepted by the opposite party and dropped the auction sale and came forward to delock the property and redelivered the property to the complainant.  But the complainant refused to take possession of the property after issuing a letter dated:02.12.2006 as per Ex.A28. The “No Due Certificate” demanded by the opposite parties is something mysterious because the complainant has availed loan and the loan amount was paid  by the complainant to the opposite parties who is liable to issue “No Due Certificate” and the possession was not handed over to the complainant and thereafter, on compulsion receiving letter Ex.B6 & Ex.B7  possession of property was handed over to the complainant proves the harassment and mental agony on exercising unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.  Further the contention of the opposite parties is that the compensation claimed is exorbitant and imaginary. But no reason attributed by the opposite parties.  Considering the facts and circumstances of this case this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties shall pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.  The opposite parties 1 to 5 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) to the complainant.

The above amounts shall be payablewithin six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 07^th day of June 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

		Copy of letter from the opposite party
		Copy of legal notice from the opposite party
		Copy of letter from the opposite party
		Copy of telegram from the opposite party
		Copy of letter from the opposite party
		Copy of letter from the opposite party
		Copy of letter from the opposite party
		Copy of letter from the opposite party
		Copy of letter from the opposite party
		Copy of reply sent by the complainant
		Copy of letter from the complainant’s wife
		Copy of notice from the opposite party
		Copy of paper publication in Malar Sudar
		Copy of possession notice
		Copy of possession notice paper publication
		Copy of Auction Sale Notice Makkal Kural
		Copy of letter of complainant
		Copy of notice of opposite party
		Copy of letter of complainant
		Copy of Minutes of Meeting
		Copy of letter of complainant
		Copy of letter of complainant
		Copy of letter of complainant
		Copy of Medical certificate
		Copy of letter from the opposite party
		Copy of letter of the complainant
		Copy of legal notice on behalf of the complainant
		Copy of letter of the opposite party
		Copy of undertaking obtained by the opposite party
		Copy of letter of the opposite party
		Copy of letter of the complainant
		Copy of Fax message sent by the complainant
		Copy of legal notice for compensation

 

OPPOSITE  PARTIES SIDE DOCUMENTS:  

Ex.B1	25.02.1997	Copy of loan offer letter
Ex.B2	25.06.2006	Copy of paper publication
Ex.B3	25.08.2006	Copy of paper publication
Ex.B4	29.08.2006	Copy of paper publication
Ex.B5	14.09.2006	Copy of paper publication
Ex.B6	06.12.2006	Copy of acknowledgement of delivery
Ex.B7	06.12.2006	Copy of acknowledgement of delivery

 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT