D.O.F:05/01/2018
D.O.O:10/05/2023
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KASARAGOD
CC.02/2018
Dated this, the 10th day of May 2023
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
Sarojiniyamma,
W/o Vijayan, :Complainant
Madathilkkattil,
Mundamani (P.O)
Kasaragod.
(Adv. Saritha S.N)
And
The Manager,
SBI, Vellarikkund Branch, : Opposite Party
Vellarikkund,
Kasaragod.
(Adv. Mohan Prakash .K)
ORDER
SRI.KRISHNAN.K :PRESIDENT
The Complaint filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
The case of the Complainant is that she is maintaining herself by the income out of sale of milk. She obtained loan facility of Rs.15,000/- from Opposite Party bank for purchase of a cow, with repayment condition by remitting Rs.420/- per months. She repaid only Rs.7,300/- later informed that loan is written off as per then Government circular being an agricultural loan. There was adalath in SBI branch Vellarikundu. She received notice showing borrowed amount as Rs.27,920/- and balance is shown as Rs.9,633/-. From 2010 onward no demand for repayment is made. She su1ffered mental tension, agony and claimed for compensation of Rs.25,000/- and litigation cost.
2. The Opposite Party filed its written version. The case of Opposite Party is that loan amount is Rs.30,000/- in the year 2005. Loan amount is not cleared in full. As on 01/02/2018 and Rs.9,633/- is found due. There is no deficiency in service since money is claimed as per law for recovery of money due thereof. The complainant is not entitled for loan waiver issue of notice date 01/08/2018 is admitted and Complainant is not entitled for any relief.
3. The Complainant filed chief affidavit documents Ext.A1 is pass book, A2 is receipts, A3 Adalath notice given by Opposite Party marked. Opposite Party filed documents marked as Ext.B1 to B4.
4. From the documents and evidence made available following issues arise for consideration.
a) Whether there is any deficiency is service of Opposite Party in demanding amount due under the loan agreement.
b) Whether the Complainant is entitled for consideration? If so for what reliefs?
All points discussed together for convenience.
5. The Complainant was cross examined by Opposite Party. She admitted payments of Rs.7,300/- endorsed in Ext.B4 account statement. Opposite Party made suggestion that total Rs.14,800/- alone is repaid. No official letter issued to her informing loan writing off. Bank claims Rs.19,473/- is still due to bank. Loan originally obtained from Kanhangad later shifted to Vellarikundu Branch.
6. The fact remains that as per Ext.A3 notice shows loan amount as Rs.27,920/- notice is sent on 19/08/2017. Date of availing of loan is shown as 05/06/2005. Ext.A1 to A3 marked without objects.
7. The Opposite Party bank has no case that bank made any demand for repayment of loan availed in 2005 till 2017 evidenced by Ext.A3 notice.
8. The Opposite Party is not able to justify as to why no step taken against complainant for such a long period for recovery of amount due if any. The bank is not entitled to recover the amount as it is time barred.
9. Since claim is found to be unjustified, there is deficiency in service from Opposite Party side in the matter. There is no contra evidence from the side of Opposite Party. Where a bank is providing service to its customer, it owes a duty to exercise reasonable care to protect the interests of the customers. Needless to say that a bank owes duty to its customers to take necessary steps to prevent claim for money without any further legal action for a long period but sending a notice long after and it is evident that complainant has suffered mental tension and agony due to deficiency in service of the Opposite Party.
10. The Complainant claimed Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for deficiency is service of Opposite Party and it is not supported by evidence. The claim is excessive. Since the complainant finds that a sum of Rs.5,000/- is reasonable compensation in the case and also liable for cost of litigation.
11. In the result complaint is allowed in part with a direction to Opposite Party to pay Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) as compensation for deficiency in service from their part and pay Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) for cost of litigation within 30 days of the receipt of the order.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1: Pass Book
A2: Receipts
A3: Adalath Notice
B1: Loan Application form
B2: Bank notice
B3: Loan agreement
B4: Statement of Account
B5: Statement of account
Witness Cross examined
PW1: Sarojini C.S
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Ps/ Assistant Registrar
