IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS’ DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSORE<br /> <br /> PRESENT: 1. Shri.A.T.Munnoli<br /> B.A., L.L.B (Spl.) - President <br /> <br /> 2. Smt.Y.V.Uma Shenoi<br /> M.Sc., B.Ed., - Member<br /> 3. Shri. Shivakumar.J.<br /> B.A., L.L.B., - Member<br /> <br /> CC 396/09 DATED 08.12.2009<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> Complainant K.M.Kumaraswamy,<br /> E-57, 4th A Main Road, Near Church, Ramakrishnanagara, Mysore-570022.<br /> (By Sri.Venkateshwara Koushik, Advocate)<br /> <br /> Vs. <br /> Opposite Party LIC Housing Finance Ltd., <br /> 2nd Floor, Govardhana Complex, Harsha Road, Mysore.<br /> <br /> (By Sri. H.V.Aswathanayarana Gupta, Advocate)<br /> <br /> Nature of complaint : Deficiency in service<br /> Date of filing of complaint : 28.10.2009<br /> Date of appearance of O.P. : 12.11.2009<br /> Date of order : 08.12.2009<br /> Duration of Proceeding : 1 MONTH 4 DAYS<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. A.T.Munnoli,<br /> President<br /> <br /> 1. The complainant has filed the complaint, seeking a direction to the opposite party to return the original documents and also to award compensation and cost of the proceedings.<br /> <br /> 2. In the complaint, it is alleged that, complainant had availed house loan from the opposite party to the extent of Rs.1,25,000/- by furnishing original documents. Through the Canara Bank Branch, Kuvempunagar, installments have been paid. The opposite party informed on 01.04.2009, that a sum of Rs.780.17 is due and accordingly, that amount has been paid by the complainant. Entire loan has been repaid. In spite of repeated requests, the opposite party has not returned the original documents. Hence, it is prayed to allow the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. In the version, opposite party has admitted certain facts alleged in the complaint, but, it is contended that, one Smt.T.R.Shashikala, the complainant in CC 296/09 had claimed that wrongly she remitted five installments to the extent of Rs.12,973/- into the loan account of the present complainant and hence, the documents of the complainant have been withheld. In the said criminal case, this Forum has directed the opposite party to credit Rs.12,973/- into the account of Smt.T.R.Shashikala by debiting that amount from the account of the present complainant. If that amount is debited from the account of the complainant, there will be sort of said amount in the loan account of the complainant. Hence, the complainant has to pay said amount with interest to the opposite party. If, the complainant pays that amount, the opposite party is ready to give original documents to the complainant. Hence, it is contend that, the complainant has unnecessarily dragged the opposite party to the Forum.<br /> <br /> 4. To prove the facts alleged in the complaint, the complainant has filed his affidavit and produced certain documents. On the other hand, the Assistant Executive of the opposite party has filed his affidavit. We have heard the arguments of the complainant in person and so also, that of his learned counsel and in addition to it, written arguments are filed. Also, we have heard the arguments of the learned advocate for the opposite party and perused the records.<br /> <br /> 5. Now the points arises for consideration are as under:-<br /> 1. Whether the complainant has proved any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and that he is entitled to the reliefs sought?<br /> 2. What order?<br /> <br /> 6. Our findings are as under:-<br /> Point no.1 : In the negative.<br /> Point no.2 : As per the order.<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 7. Point no. 1:- According to the complainant, he has repaid the entire loan amount, but the opposite party has not returned the documents. The opposite party has contended that, one Smt.T.R.Shashikala had credited installments to the tune of Rs.12,973/- into the loan account of the complainant and she has obtained an order in C.C.296/09 and as such, that amount has to be adjusted or re-credited to her account and in such a case, there will be outstanding balance to the said extent in the loan account of the complainant. In other words, according to the opposite party, the complainant has due in a sum of Rs.12,973/-.<br /> <br /> 8. Wisely, the complainant has alleged in the complaint that, on 01.04.2009, opposite party informed that entire loan has been repaid except Rs.780/-, for which statement has been furnished and that amount has been paid by the complainant to the opposite party. Thus, the complainant contend that, entire loan has been repaid. In the affidavit also, the complainant has sworn to the said fact. But, all along the opposite party in the version as well as in the affidavit, specifically contended that, Smt.T.R.Shashikala has wrongly credited a sum of Rs.12,973/- into the loan account of the complainant. The complainant in his affidavit not denied the said contention for the opposite party. However, in the written arguments submitted by the complainant, it is stated that, without any break regularly installments were paid by the complainant. Also in the written arguments, at para 9 it is stated that, copy of the passbook is produced. But, statement of account of the opposite party bank is produced. Also, Xerox copy of the portion of account of the complainant with Canara Bank is produced. But, from this extract, it cannot be made out that, the complainant has paid the entire loan of the opposite party.<br /> <br /> 9. It is definite and specific case of the opposite party that, Smt.T.R.Shashikala has credited installments of 10/7 to 2/8 into the loan account of the complainant. To establish that during this period, the complainant also paid the installments to the opposite party bank, the complainant has not produced any documents. So also, that is not pleaded in the complaint and spoken to by the complainant in his affidavit. When the opposite party specifically contended that, Smt.T.R.Shashikala has wrongly credited the said amount into the account of the complainant, no reason is assigned, as to why the complainant has not denied or disputed that fact. If really, Smt.T.R.Shashikala has not paid that amount into the account of the complainant, the complainant could have stated that fact in his affidavit. Moreover, just to verify the correctness or otherwise, we have called upon the entire record of C.C.No.296/09 and on verification, we found that in fact Smt.T.R.Shashikala has credited the said amount into the loan account of the present complainant. Accordingly, in that case, this Forum has passed an order. Under the circumstances, unless and until the complainant prove that he has repaid the entire loan, that there is deficiency on the part of the opposite party, cannot be accepted.<br /> <br /> 10. The complainant contend that, on 01.04.2009 opposite party called upon him to the bank and told balance is only Rs.780/- and directed to credit that amount and accordingly, that is credited and hence, entire loan has been cleared. To that effect, a statement of account has been furnished. But, here it is important to note that, before the said date, during 10/7 to 2/8 Smt.T.R.Shashikala had credited Rs.12,973/- into the account of the complainant. Having taken into credit of that amount into the account of the complainant, the balance of Rs.780/- was remained in the account of the complainant. At the cost of repetition, in fact, prior to the said date, Smt.T.R.Shashikala had credited the amount into the account of the complainant. Hence, the fact that after the complainant paid Rs.780/- and the bank issued statement of account to that effect does not mean that, the complainant himself has repaid the entire amount.<br /> <br /> 11. During the course of arguments, we specifically called upon the complainant as well as his advocate to produce any document or evidence to show that, in fact during the months 10/7 to 2/8, the complainant paid the installments to the opposite party. For that, no document or evidence is produced. If really, the complainant had paid that amount, certainly the complainant could have produced the documents. No reasons for non-production of any documents in this regard, are assigned. Hence, adverse inference shall have to be drawn. The Xerox copy of passbook of Canara Bank produced by the complainant pertains to from April 2009 to September 2009. It is the definite case of the complainant through cheques of Canara Bank, he has paid the installments to the opposite party. At the cost of repetition, if really during said period complainant had paid the installments to the opposite party, he could have produced other evidence including passbook pertaining to the said period also. But, purposely, the complainant has not produced the passbook pertaining to earlier period. It goes to show that, with malafide intention, the complainant has withheld the documents to get himself enriched from the amount that Smt.T.R.Shashikala has credited into the account of the complainant.<br /> <br /> 12. Considering the facts and the evidence on record, the complainant has not approached the Forum with clean hands and even though, he has not repaid the entire loan taking shelter that Smt.T.R.Shashikala has wrongly credited the amount into his loan account, he is contending that he has repaid the entire loan. That has not been proved. On the other hand, from the records of CC 296/09, manifestly it is clear that Smt.T.R.Shashikala has credited the amount in question into the loan account of the present complainant. Hence, the present complainant cannot be allowed to be enriched. Under the circumstances, no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party has been established.<br /> <br /> 13. Accordingly we answer the point in negative.<br /> <br /> 14. Point No. 2:- Considering the discussion made above and conclusion arrived at, we pass the following order:- <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 1. The Complaint is dismissed with cost of Rs.5,000/-.<br /> 2. The complainant shall pay the said cost, within one month from the date of this order and out of the said amount, only Rs.1,000/- shall be paid to the opposite party and remaining amount of Rs.4,000/- shall be credited to the Legal Aid Account of this Forum. <br /> 3. Give a copy of this order to each party according to Rules.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, transcript revised by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this the day 8th December 2009)<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (A.T.Munnoli) <br /> President <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Y.V.Uma Shenoi)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Shivakumar.J.)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />