Date of filing : 08.01.2018
Date of order : 30.09.2022
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, VELLORE, AT VELLORE DISTRICT
PRESENT: THIRU. A. MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM, B.A.,B.L. PRESIDENT
THIRU. R. ASGHAR KHAN, B.Sc.,B.L. MEMBER- I
SELVI. I. MARIAN RAJAM ANUGRAHA, M.B.A., MEMBER -II
FRIDAY THE 30th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO: 4/2018
S. Murugapandian,
S/o. Sathiyamurthy,
No. 6/2, Kollakuntai,
Madhakadappu, Road,
Sanrorkuppam Post,
Ambur Taluk – 635 814. …Complainant
-Vs-
The Manager,
Bank of Maharashtra,
Ambur Branch,
No. 11/2, Vijaya Complex,
Byepass Road,
Melkrishnapuram,
Ambur – 635 802. …Opposite party
Counsel for complainant : Thiru. P. Chandrasekar
Counsel for opposite party : Thiru. A.S. Karthikeyan & Thiru. A.R. Devarajan
ORDER
THIRU. A. MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM, B.A.,B.L., PRESIDENT,
This complaint has been filed Under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The complainant has prayed this Hon’ble Commission to direct the opposite party to return back 87.6 grams gold jewels and to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony.
1.The case of the complaint briefly is as follows:
The complainant has a saving A/c. bearing no. 68014728847 from 02.09.2016 onwards with opposite party and thereby he is a customer of opposite party. The complainant used to avail a jewel loan from the opposite party and he also redeemed in the kill manner. On 18.07.2014 the complainant availed a jewel loan by pledging his jewels of gold ring weighing 8.1 grams, Thali Saradu 40.2 grams and gold Lakshmi dollar weighing 39.3 grams in total 87.6 grams and availed as jewel loan for Rs.1,61,500/-. The loan A/c no. as 60175020871. Further the complainant states that the opposite party gave an acknowledgement card for the receipt of the aforesaid jewels, vide no G-1152. Further they did not furnish any information regarding the condition for the said jewel loan. That being so, the complainant to regularize his jewel loan a/c visited of Rs.47,500/- in his jewel loan a/c and the opposite party issued the acknowledgement for the above said amount. Thereafter on 06.01.2016 the complainant visited the opposite party bank and informed to the opposite party about the redemption of the above said jewels. But the manager of the opposite party informed that they had already sent auction notice on 05.12.2015 and subsequently the said jewels were sold in public auction. Further he also informed that it is for your fault, even after receipt of the jewels notice and now we cannot do anything. Then the complainant suffered mental agony, in view of the lethargic answer given by the opposite party. The Complainant is a member of Tamil Nadu Trade Union Centre. And he send a notice through the aforesaid union on 09.01.2016. The opposite party received the notice and gave a false reply accepting partial statement of complainant and refusing the other point. The complainant further states that he has not received any notice from the opposite party as alleged by the opposite party. The auction notice and redemption notice are conflicting with each other. And thus the complainant is entitled to the claim in view of the notice dated 09.01.2016. Further the notice for the complainant dated 18.02.2016 for which the opposite party changes their stand from their earlier reply notice dated 22.01.2016. The opposite party has lost their auctioned jewels due to illegal and unfair trade practice of the opposite party. Further, this created a problem in the complainant’s marital life and his mother also fell sick and died on 28.05.2016. As a result, the complainant suffered mental agony which will not be compensated at any cost. Further the acts of the opposite parties are deceptive in nature. Therefore, the complainant filed this complaint and asks this Commission to direct the opposite party to return the jewels and compensate for mental agony. Hence, this complaint.
2. The Written version of opposite party is as follows:
The compliant filed by the complainant is false, frivolous is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed. It is for the complainant to prove the averment denied by this opposite party. As per the complaint filed by the complainant as mentioned in para 1, the complainant is a customer of the opposite party from 02.09.2013 having saving a/c no. 68014728847. It is true that he complainant is a customer by using the bank as a saving account holder and by availing a jewel loan from the opposite party and redeemed the same more than once. Therefore, the complainant is well aware regarding the jewel loan. As stated by the complainant on 18.07.2014 he has availed a jewel loan of Rs.1,67,500/- by pledging his jewel weighing 82.6 grams. This jewels loan A/c no is 60175020871. The jewel card no is G-1152, is also correct. It is false to state that the complainant visited the opposite party bank on 06.01.2016 to redeem the jewels. In fact, the complainant did not come to the bank after 27.07.2015. Therefore, the said jewel loan was classified and NPA (Non Performing Asset) therefore the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.47,500/- on 27.07.2015 in the aforesaid jewel loan A/c. On that day he also promised that he will pay the remaining payment but he never turned up. Subsequently he also did not pay any money in the aforesaid jewel loan a/c. Hence, the jewel loan again became overdue. As a result, the opposite party issued recall notice on 16.11.2015 by registered post. Thereafter this opposite party made several attempts in the address available with the opposite party. As the complainant did not pay the loan amount of Rs.1,43,047/- plus interest charges and other charges the opposite party issued auction notice stating if the complainant failed to pay the above said overdue within 7 days the jewels of the complainant will be sold in public auction. The same notice was received by the complainant and the acknowledgement card was returned to the opposite party, but state that the complainant did not turn up and did not repay the jewel loan. Therefore on 05.12.2015 auction notice was sent to the complainant by registered post. In this notice it was clearly mentioned that if the complaint did not pay the jewel loan amount within 15 days from the receipt of the above notice, the jewels will be sold in public auction. The complainant did not pay the jewel loan amount and hence the complainant’s jewels were sold in public auction on 21.12.2015. The sale proceeds of the auctioned jewels were adjusted in the complainant’s aforesaid jewel loan and the balance amount was credited in the complainant saving bank a/c. On 06.01.2016 when the complainant came to the opposite party bank, the opposite party informed about the sale of his jewels in public auction as per law. The complainant had accepted the same and went back. Thereafter, the complainant issued a notice through Tamil Nadu Trade Union Centre with false particulars, which this opposite party suitably gave a reply on 21.01.2016 Again the complainant sent another notice dated 18.02.2016 through the Tamil Nadu Trade Union Centre for which also the opposite party replied on 17.03.2016 through his counsel. It is false to state that the opposite party had done unfair trade practice by illegal means. As a result, this was a family problem which led to death of complainant’s mother, it is also false to state that the complainant suffered mental agony which will not be compensated at any cost. This opposite party never adopted any deceptive service and the notice issued through Tamil Nadu union is not void and there was no privity between the complainant and the Tamil Nadu Trade Union Centre. Further it is also false to state that the acts by the opposite parties are illegal and against the Consumer Protection Act 1986. This opposite party have done their duty. The complainant filed this compliant with false particulars with a view to grab money from this opposite party. Therefore, this complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost to this opposite party.
3. Proof affidavit of complainant filed, Ex.A1 to Ex.10 were marked. Proof affidavit of opposite party filed. Ex.B1 to Ex.B9 were marked. Written argument of both sides filed.
4.The points that of arises for consideration are:
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite
party?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for relief as claimed in the complaint?
3. To what relief complainant is entitled to?
5. Point Nos. 1&2: The complainant is a saving account holder of opposite party form 02.09.2013 onwards his Account number is 6801478847. On 18.07.2014 the complainant availed a jewel loan of Rs.1,61,500/- by pledging his jewels of 3 items in total 87.6 grams. The said jewels card is Ex.A2. Thereafter he has made part payment of Rs.47,500/- on 27.07.2015. The allegation of the complainant is that the opposite party without giving proper notice auctioned the jewels of the complainant. On the other hand the opposite party in their written version stating that, since the complainant account became declared as Non Performing Asset (NPA). The opposite party issued recall notice (Ex.B1) on 16.11.2015 asking the complainant to pay the overdue amount of Rs.1,43,047/- within 7 days. But the complainant did not turned up for settling the above said loan. Thereafter, the opposite party issued auction notice on 05.12.2015 (Ex.B3). For which also the complainant did not respond. Hence, the opposite party conducted the public auction on 21.12.2015 and realized the loan amount in full and balance amount was deposited in complainant’s account. There was no irregularity in auctioning the complainant’s jewels. In this regard, we referred the guidelines issued by RBI which mandates that the auctionor is liable to serve an auction notice to the loanee atleast 21 days ahead of such proposed auction date. This notice should be sent by registered post. In the present case, the opposite party though the auction date is mentioned as 05.12.2015 but auction notice was sent only on 08.12.2015 and mentioning the date of auction as 21.12.2015. Therefore, there is a lapse of 7 days in issuing the mandatory personal notice. Further the RBI also insists that an advertisement of the auction (with its scheduled date, location and time) has to be issued in a minimum of two leading local Newspaper. Auctioneer should also ensure that at least one newspaper should be in printing in the borrower vernacular language, while another in any national daily. But in the present case, admittedly no paper publications were made as mentioned in RBI regulation. Therefore, there is a material irregularity in the above auction by the opposite party. Accordingly, the auction conducted by the opposite party is illegal and thereby we find that the opposite party committed deficiency in service. Hence, these Point Nos. 1 and 2 are decided in favour of the complainant.
6. POINT NO. 3: As we have decided in point Nos. 1 and 2 that there is a deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The opposite party is hereby directed to return the complainant’s jewels of weighing 87.6 grams on receipt of the jewel loan amount of Rs.1,61,500/- (Rupees One Lakh Sixty One Thousand and Five Hundred only) after deducting the amount if any paid by the complainant. In the alternative the opposite party is hereby directed to pay Rs.4,08,654/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty Four only) the present market value of the jewels and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) towards cost to the complainant. Hence, this Point No.3 is also answered accordingly.
7. In the result this complaint partly allowed. The opposite party is hereby directed to return the complainant’s jewels of weighing 87.6 grams on receipt of the jewel loan amount of Rs.1,61,500/- (Rupees One Lakh Sixty One Thousand and Five Hundred only) after deducting the amount if any paid by the complainant. In the alternative the opposite party is hereby directed to pay Rs.4,08,654/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty Four only) the present market value of the jewels and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) towards cost to the complainant, within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the above amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of this order to till the date of realization.
Dictated to the steno-typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 30th September,2022.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER –I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT
LIST OF COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:
Ex.A1 - Copy of bank pass book
Ex.A2 - Bank loan Sleep
Ex.A3-27.07.2018 - Bill receipt
Ex.A4-09.01.2016 - Complainant legal notice with acknowledgement card
Ex.A5-22.01.2016 - Opposite party legal notice and Postal cover
Ex.A6-18.02.2016 - Complainant reply notice of the opposite party and
Two acknowledgement card
Ex.A7-17.03.2016 - Respondent legal notice and Postal cover
Ex.A8 - Death certificate
Ex.A9 - Copy of complainant’s family card
Ex.A10 - Copy of complainant’s mother’s family card
LIST OF OPPOSITE APRTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:
Ex.B1-16.11.2015 - Recall notice
Ex.B2-19.11.2015 - Acknowledgement card
Ex.B3-05.12.2015 - Sale notice
Ex.B4-09.12.2015 - Acknowledgement card
Ex.B5-09.01.2016 - Trade Union letter
Ex.B6-22.01.2016 - Respondent reply letter
Ex.B7 - Respondent Acknowledgement card
Ex.B8-18.02.2016 - Trade Union letter
Ex.B9-17.03.2016 - Advocate’s reply legal notice to said Trade Union Centre
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER –I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT
