Goa

North Goa

CC/19/2023

UDAY BALKRISHNA JAMBHEKAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA - Opp.Party(s)

21 Apr 2023

ORDER

 

 

 

 

 

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NORTH GOA AT PORVORIM.

 

   CORAM: MRS. BELA N. NAIK, HON’BLE PRESIDENT

                     MR. AUROLIANO DE OLIVEIRA, PRESIDING MEMBER.

                     

                                                                                              

                                                                                                       Case No. 19/2023

 

Mr. Uday Balkrishna Jambhekar

R/o. FF2, Shetye Sanjeevi Sudha Colony

Bordem, Bicholim,

North – Goa.                                                          ..........       Complainant

                     

                 V/s

 

M/s. Life Insurance Corporation,

Central Office – Yogakshema

Jeevan Bima Marg,

Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021                         ..........      Opposite Party

 

 

Complaint dated: 31/03/2023

Order dated: 21/04/2023.

 

Complainant Mr. Uday Balkrishna Jambhekar present in person at the time of Arguments and at the time of passing of Order.

 

ORDER

( Per Auroliano De Oliveira, Presiding Member)

 

By this Order we shall dispose of the Complaint dated 31/03/2023 filed by the Complainant under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 at the Admission stage.

Brife facts:

 

1. It is the case of the Complainant that he has applied for the loan with the Opposite Party against his Policy bearing No. 953625494 on February 2021 of Rs. 3,00,000/- ( Rupees Three lakhs only).

 

2. The Complainant states that as he could not submit the prescribe documents to avail the loan from the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party rejected the loan of the Complainant.

 

3. The Complainant states that on 18^th March 2021, the Complainant re-applied for the loan with the Opposite Party with request No. 2021040263209 as the earlier loan was not sanctioned by the Opposite Party.

 

4. The Complainant further states that on 23/03/2021, the second loan bearing No. 2021040263209 also which he had applied was also rejected by the Opposite Party for not submitting the required documents as prescribed in the Loan Application Form.

 

5. The Complainant states that on 31^st March 2021, the Complainant re-applied for the loan bearing No. 202104266185 for third time. The Complainant further states that the said loan has been sanctioned by the Opposite Party and the amount is transferred in the Bank Account of the Complainant and thereby started deducting the interest from the LIC Policy which the Complainant is holding with the Opposite Party.

 

6.  It is the case of the Complainant that the Complainant requested the Opposite Party to cancel the said loan which the Opposite Party had sanctioned as he managed to arrange the money for his expense from other source.

 

7. The Complainant states that the Opposite Party refused to cancel the said loan bearing No. 202104266185 and continued to deduct the interest from the LIC Policy of the Complainant thereby causing gross financial loss to the Complainant. Hence the Complainant has stepped in this Consumer Commission seeking the directions from this Commission.

 

8. We have heard the Complainant Mr. Uday Balkrishna Jambhekar at length and perused all the documents placed on record in support of his complaint.

 

9. After perusal the complaint and documents relied by the Complainant, we are of the considered opinion that there is no relationship between the Complainant and the Opposite Party as a Buyer and Seller neither a Service Provider as mentioned in the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

10. We find that the Relationship between the Complainant and the Opposite Party is Creditor and Debtor. In this complaint the Complainant Mr. Uday Balkrishna Jambhekar has borrowed the money in terms of loan to fulfill his economic needs. Therefore the Complainant is a Borrower in this context and the Opposite Party is a Creditor. Therefore the relationship between the two parties is that of a Creditor and Debtor. As per the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 the Complainant doesn’t have a locus standi to file a consumer complaint as a Borrower/Debtor.

 

11.  We further find that the Complainant seeks directions from this Commission to revert the interest which the Opposite Party has deducted and further to stop the Opposite Party deducting the future interest on the said loan which is obtained by the Complainant. First and foremost the Complainant has to understand that this Commission is established under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and not establish under any other Code. The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission does not have Powers/Jurisdiction to direct the other parties. The functioning of the Consumer Commission is a quasi-judicial in nature with limited powers.

 

12.  We are not impressed by arguments adduced by the Complainant and for the above reasons we are not inclined to admit the complaint filed by the Complainant and we pass the following Order:

 

O R D E R

The complaint is hereby rejected at the admission stage.

 

 

Pronounced in Open Court.

 

Proceedings closed.

 

 

(Ms.BelaNaik)                                                                                                                                                                                                         

•  

 

                                                   

(Mr. Auroliano De Oliveira)

•