O R D E R

By Sri. C.T. Sabu, President :

          Facts of the Case :

          The complainant has availed Rs.54,000/- as loan from the 1^st opposite party on 29/02/12 and Rs.43,000/- on 22/02/12 respectively for purchasing two cows and for the milking machine. During the pendency of the loan the cows were died due to foot and mouth disease. At the time of availing the loan the 1^st opposite party made believe that there is credit guarantee insurance for the loan amount if any catastrophe was occurred. The subsidy available from the government and their Credit Guarantee Insurance amount also will be adjusted with the loan account and there will not be any liability to the complainant. The details of the purchase of the cows and the photographs of the cows and other concerned documents are entrusted with 3^rd opposite party for the Credit Guarantee Insurance purpose. After the death of the cows the fact was duly intimated with the 1^st & 3^rd opposite parties and the required signed documents are entrusted with the 1^st opposite party to adjust the Credit Guarantee Insurance amount towards the loan account. The 1^st opposite party was informed the complainant that the amount will be duly adjusted to the bank account and complainant is not required to pay any amount further. A loan was sanctioned as per the direction of the government the 1^st opposite party is liable to ensure the Credit Guarantee Insurance for the loan availed by the complainant. But after 1 year of the death of the cows on 27/02/15 with the instruction of the 2^nd opposite party, 4^th opposite party issued RR notice for Rs.86,085/- along with 5%  collection charge again on 10/03/15 another notice issued for Rs.66,613/- along with 5% interest issued by the 4^th opposite party for the 2^nd loan. The complainant is not liable to pay any amount to the 1^st opposite party. Receiving the RR Notices which caused mental agony to the complainant. The initiation of the RR proceedings amounts deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence this complaint.

          2) The opposite parties appeared through counsel and filed detailed version denying the averments in the complaint. On behalf of the 1^st opposite party separate version is filed. In their version they have contended that

1. The complaint is not maintainable under law and facts.
2. The opposite party acted bonafidely under their official designation to recover the debt due from the complainant.
3. No money is forfeited towards the insurance amount as alleged in the complaint. The insurance is a subject matter of requisition and the complainant have not requested or intimated about the insurance which is claimed by the complainant.
4. The complainant had not availed any loan from the 1^st opposite party for the purchase of cows as alleged in the complaint.
5. The opposite party admitted the loan availed by the complainant but the loan availed on 22/02/12 was for manuring purpose and on 29/02/12 was for the purchase of milk machine.
6. No loan is availed for the purchase of cows from the 1^st opposite party.
7. The 1^st opposite party had not credited any amount towards the loan account from the government or any authority as subsidy.
8. No consideration was accepted by the opposite party from the complainant for Credit Guarantee Insurance.
9. No commitment was made by the opposite party to the complainant for the repayment as alleged in the complaint. This is not the responsibility of the opposite party to provide Credit Guarantee Insurance to the complainant. The opposite party contacted the complainant in person and issued notice for the repayments of the loans availed by him. When the complainant was reluctant to pay the amount then the opposite party taken steps to recover the amount through legal proceedings under RR proceedings. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties hence complaint has to be dismissed.

          3) 2^nd to 4^th opposite parties also filed separate version denying the averments of the complainant. In their version they have admitted that as per the requisition of the 1^st opposite party through the RRC 2015/10505/8 and  2015/12004/8 issued by the District Collector as per the Revenue Recovery Act they have initiated Recovery proceedings against the complainant. As per the RR Certificate 2015/10505/8 issued notice for Rs.86,085/- with interest @ 13% from 14/02/15 and for 5% collection charge. As per RR 2015/12004/8 notice issued for Rs.66,613/- with interest @ 14% from 14/02/15 and for 5% as collection charge. As per the RR Act Section 7 & 34 demand notice was issued to the complainant through the 4^th opposite party on 21/03/15 and 23/03/15 respectively. After their information so far the complainant paid loan amount. As per the information from the Diary Development Office Thalikkulam no loan was allowed to the complainant for purchase of Cows for the period of 2011-2022. The proceedings taken by the opposite parties are legal and as per Section 72 of RR Act the complaint is not maintainable as no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

          4) The points for consideration are :

                    a) Whether there is any deficiency in service from the side of

                      opposite parties ?

                   b) If yes, reliefs and costs ?

          5) When the case came up for evidence the complainant filed proof affidavit. He affirmed and explained all the averments in the complaint. The documents produced by him were marked as Exts. P1 to P10. Ext. P1 is the copy of Demand Notice under Section  7 dtd.10/03/15 issued by Village Officer of Valappad; Ext. P2 is the copy of Demand Notice under Section 7 dtd.27/02/15 issued by Village Officer of Valappad; Ext. P3 is the Lawyer Notice dtd.08/12/14; Ext. P4 is the Lawyer Notice dtd.08/12/14; Ext. P5 copy of Retail Invoice dtd.26/03/12 for Rs.60,000/-; Ext. P6 is the Loan Pass Book of the complainant; Ext. P7 is the Reply letter dtd.29/08/14 under RTI Act; Ext. P8 is the copy of Certificate issued by Valappad Gramapanchayath Krishi Bhavan; Ext. P9 is the copy of Certificate of Merits issued by ATMA, Thrissur and Ext. P10 is the copy of Certificate of Merits issued by ATMA, Thrissur. The 1^st opposite party also filed counter proof affidavit to the tune of the version filed by then and denied the allegations of the complainant in detail. The  documents produced from their side marked as Exts. R1 to R14.  Ext. R1 is the copy of Application for Agricultural advances; Ext. R2 is the copy of Intimation of terms and conditions of loans sanctioned; Ext. R3 is the copy of Memorandum of Agreement for agricultural loans; Ext. R4 is the copy of acknowledgement of Debt and Security of Borrower/Coobligant; Ext. R5 is the copy of Statement of account for the period of 22/02/12 to 14/05/15 of complainant; Ext. R6 is the copy of Application for Agricultural advances; Ext. R7 is the copy of Intimation of terms and conditions of loans sanctioned; Ext. R8 is the copy of Quotation dtd. 16/02/12; Ext. R9 is the copy of Memorandum of Agreement for agricultural loans; Ext. R10 is the copy of Guarantee Agreement; Ext. R11 is the copy of Guarantee covering letter; Ext. R12 is the Deed of Hypothecation of Machinery; Ext. R13 is the Acknowledgement of Debt and Security of Borrower / Coobligant and Ext. R14 is the statement of account for the period for 29/02/12 to 14/05/15 of the complainant. 1^st opposite party was examined as RW1.

          6) We have meticulously          gone through the averments of the complaint as well as the proof affidavit of the complainant. Also gone through the contentions of the version filed by the opposite parties and examined the deposition of the RW1. Perused the documents produced by all the parties.

          7) The case of the complainant is that he availed loan from the 1^st opposite party purchasing of the Milking Machine and purchasing two cows. But the case of the opposite party is that the complainant never availed loan for purchasing the cows. The complainant availed Rs.54,000/- as loan on 29/02/12 for purchasing milking machine and Rs.43,000/- on 22/02/2012 for the purchase of manuring. The documents produced by the complainant are not relevant with the contentions raised in the complaint. Going through the documents nothing can be brought out in evidence with regard the averment of the complainant. The opposite party produced all relevant documents to substantiate the averments made by the 1^st opposite party in their version. The complainant failed to establish any Credit Guarantee Insurance was existing with regard to the loan. From Ext. R2 & R7 it is crystal clear that the loan was availed by the complainant only for manuring & for purchase of machinery. No documents are produced by the complainant to show that the loan was availed for purchase of cows also. The complaint is filed without any bonafides. No reliable evidence adduced by the complainant to prove the case. After availing the loan the complainant failed to pay the loan amount in time. That is why the bank initiated Revenue Recovery proceedings against him after due notices. The documents produced by the opposite parties are sufficient to prove that the complainant evaded from the payment and they were constrained to take RR proceedings against the complainant. RW1 established all the relevant documents produced by them during the cross examination. The complainant’s wording was narrated by RW1 without any suspicion. The complainant was not entitled to get any Credit Guarantee Insurance benefit at any rate. The complainant is not entitled to get any insurance benefit as alleged in the complaint. The complainant thoroughly failed to establish a cogent case in his favour. The opposite parties 2^nd & 3^rd acted upon the request of the 1^st opposite party as per the RR Act. No deficiency or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.

          We are in the opinion that the interference of this Forum/Commission is unwarranted at this stage and the complainant is not deserved to get any order in his favour. Hence we are inclined to dismiss the complaint.

          In the result the complaint stands dismissed.

            Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Commission this the 15^th day of February 2022.  

  Sd/-                                                                                           Sd/-    

Sreeja S.                                                                                  C. T. Sabu

Member                                                                                                      President

                                                    Appendix

Complainant’s Exhibits :

Ext. P1 copy of Demand Notice under Section  7 dtd.10/03/15

Ext. P2 copy of Demand Notice under Section 7 dtd.27/02/

Ext. P3 Lawyer Notice dtd.08/12/14

Ext. P4 Lawyer Notice dtd.08/12/14

Ext. P5 copy of Retail Invoice dtd.26/03/12 for Rs.60,000/-

Ext. P6 Loan Pass Book of the complainant

Ext. P7 Reply letter dtd.29/08/14 under RTI Act

Ext. P8 copy of Certificate issued by Valappad Gramapanchayath Krishi

              Bhavan

Ext. P9 copy of Certificate of Merits issued by ATMA, Thrissur

Ext. P10 copy of Certificate of Merits issued by ATMA, Thrissur.

Opposite Parties’ Exhibits :

Ext. R1 copy of Application for Agricultural advances

Ext. R2 copy of Intimation of terms and conditions of loans sanctioned

Ext. R3 copy of Memorandum of Agreement for agricultural loans

Ext. R4 copy of acknowledgement of Debt and Security of

             Borrower/Coobligant

Ext. R5 copy of Statement of account

Ext. R6 copy of Application for Agricultural advances

Ext. R7 copy of Intimation of terms and conditions of loans sanctioned

Ext. R8 copy of Quotation dtd. 16/02/12

Ext. R9 copy of Memorandum of Agreement for agricultural loans

Ext. R10 copy of Guarantee Agreement

Ext. R11 copy of Guarantee covering letter

Ext. R12 Deed of Hypothecation of Machinery

Ext. R13 Acknowledgement of Debt and Security of Borrower / Coobligant

Ext. R14 statement of account for the period for 29/02/12 to 14/05/15

Opposite parties’ Witness :

RW 1 Sudha K A

                                                                                                    Id/-                                                                                                                   President