Orissa

Cuttak

CC/111/2017

Kalandi Charan Sethi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director,Citicorp Finance - Opp.Party(s)

A K Samal

14 May 2019

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK.

C.C No.111/2017

 

Kalandi Charan Sethi,

Res. At: Matha Sahi,PO:Tulsipur,   

Town/Dist:Cuttack.                                                                               … Complainant.

 

                Vrs.

 

                                                                                               

1.        CITICORP FINANCE (INDIA) LIMITED

Formerly known as CitiFinancial Consumer Finance India Limited), 3 LSC,

Pushp Vihar,New Delhi-110062, represented by its

Managing Director.

 

2.        KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED,

Kotak Infiniti, 4th Floor, Building No.21,

Infinity Park, Off Western Express Highway,

General AK Vaidya Marg,Malad(E),Mumbai-400097,

Represented by its Managing Director.                                                    … Opp. Parties.

 

Present:               Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,LL.B. President.

Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member(W).

 

Date of filing:   13.09.2017

Date of Order: 14.05.2019

 

For the complainant        :        Mr. A.K.Samal,Adv. & Associates.  .

For the O.P.No.1.             :        Sri B.Panda,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.P No.2:                      Sri B.P.Sarangi,Adv. & Associates.

 

 

Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,President.

               The complainant has filed this complaint alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the O.Ps and seeking appropriate relief against them in terms of his prayer in the complaint petition.

1. The case of the complainant stated in brief is that the complainant had availed a personal loan of Rs.30,000/- from the branch office of O.P.1(The  company formerly known as Citi Financial Consumer Finance India Ltd.) situated at Buxibazar,Cuttack on 5.3.2004 to defray the educational expenses of his children.  The said loan amount had to be paid in 24 monthly installments @ Rs.1788/- each.  The concerned loan account No. was 7150369.  The statement of account of the above loan has been obtained from the O.P.1 and its copy   has been marked as Annexure-1.  It is revealed from Annexure-1 that the complainant has paid total E.M.Is of Rs.21,831.78p and the outstanding balance against him was Rs.8,168.22p.  Suddenly the said office of O.P.1 located at Buxibazar,Cuttack was closed and the complainant could not trace out the location and address of the said office despite his best effort.
2. In the mean time, 10 years have already passed.  Since the complainant was not intimated about the closure of the said company and the new address of it, he was not able to repay the E.M.I till 2015.  In that year, the complainant applied for a loan from the S.B.I Main Branch, Cuttack to meet the expenses of his daughter’s marriage and at that time he was surprised to know that his name has been shown in the list of defaulters in the report of Credit Information Bureau of India Ltd.(CIBIL) as loan of Rs.7,152/- was outstanding against him.  But in the status column of the said report it is shown that the outstanding loan was written off against the name of the complainant.  Annexure-2 is the copy of the said CIBIL report filed in this case.
3. On 19.2.15 and 5.11.15 the complainant sent two letters to O.P.1 Company by speed post requesting him to provide him all necessary facts for repayment of the outstanding loan as well as for issuance of No due certificate to him.  Annexure-3 series are copies of the above two letters dt.19.2.15 and 5.11.15.  About 9 months thereafter the complainant received a letter from O.P No.1 that his loan account has been assigned to O.P.2 for doing the needful.  The complainant was advised to contact O.P.2 henceforth for taking necessary action in connection with his outstanding loan.  The address of the O.P.2 was also furnished to the complainant.  Copy of the letter dt.17.11.15 has been filed in this connection.  Annexure-5 is the copy of the notification dt.23.8.16 by the Registrar of Companies, National Capital Territory of Delhi and Haryana, Ministry of Corporate Affairs,Govt. of India showing that the former company M/s. Citi Financial Consumer Finance India which was originally incorporated on 1.5.1997 under the Companies Act has been changed to Citi Corp. Finance India Ltd. from 17.2.14.  Annexure-6 is the copy of the letter dt.23.8.16 issued by O.P No.1 to the complainant in this connection. 
4. Subsequently the complainant was taken aback when he came to know that another loan of Rs.50,000/- was outstanding against him vide loan account No.3308895.  This fact was brought to the notice of the complainant vide letter dt.25.8.2016.  Annexure-7 is the copy of the said letter.  The new loan account has also been assigned to the O.P.2 for taking appropriate step. In  fact it is stated that the complainant has not availed any loan of Rs.50,000/- as stated above and some unscrupulous officers of the company of O.P.1 has managed to create false documents to misappropriate the funds behind the back of the complainant .  The copy of statement of loan account bearing No.7150369 for Rs.50,000/- supplied by O.P.1 has been filed in this case and marked as Annexure-8.  It is specifically stated that the name of the loanee in both the statement of accounts although is same yet their address is different.  In Annexure-8, the address of the loanee has been wrongly written as Mirkamal  Patna,Mangalabag,Cuttack instead of Matha Sahi,Tulsipur,Cuttack. This discrepancy in the address of the complainant is sufficient to prove the malafide of the O.Ps to misappropriate the funds of the complainant.  In view of the above, it can be said that there is clear proof of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the O.Ps which has caused severe mental agony and harassment to him.  It is therefore prayed that the O.Ps be directed to quash the demand under loan account vide Annexure-8, to accept the balance dues amounting to Rs.7,152/- and consequently issue ‘No Due’ certificate in favour of the complainant  and to pay Rs.50,000/- to him towards compensation besides the cost of litigation as deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.
5. Both the O.Ps 1 & 2 have entered appearance and contested the case.  They have filed two separate written version of their case.  O.P No.1 in his written version has taken the specific stand that the case is not maintainable, there is no cause of action to file the case and there is also no material to prove that the O.P.1is guilty of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice. It is further stated that there is no legal bar on the part of any company to assign or transfer any loan to other financial institutions without prior permission or notice to the loanee.  Similarly the O.P.1 being a financial institution is under legal obligation to provide the details of its borrowers to Credit Information Bureau India Ltd. and accordingly it has been done.
6. So far as the allegation of fake loan account is concerned, it is stated by O.P.1 that the loan account No.7150369 has been erroneously mentioned in letter dt.25.8.2016 which was despatched to the complainant vide Annexure-7.  It is a human error and needs to be condoned.  O.P.1 came to know about it only after filing of the present complaint by the complainant in the Court of Law.  It is also denied that the officers of O.P.1 have manufactured some false documents with intent to misappropriate Rs.50,000/- raised against the complainant as alleged by him. It is also stated that it is not the case of the complainant that any action has been taken either by O.P No.1 or O.P No.2 against the complainant pursuant to the letter dt.25.8.16 vide Annexure-7.  Rather the amount outstanding against the complainant under loan account No.3308895 is legally payable to O.P.2.  According to him the case is devoid of merit and the same may be dismissed.  In this connection the O.P.1 has filed an affidavit in support of the contentions of the written version of his case by the authorized signatory.
7. In the written version of O.P.2 it is admitted that it being a Banking and Financial Company, it purchased the financial losses/debt/mortgage/assets/loan amount etc. from O.P.1 and the same was assigned to O.P.2 on 26.11.14.  This fact was intimated to the complainant vide letter dt.27.4.15 that loan was financed by O.P.1 under an agreement bearing Account No.3380885.
8. It is further stated that the O.P.2 has its branches all over the country.  It is not sporadic in few numbers.  It is therefore stated that it is the duty of the complainant who is a defaulter to settle the loan account as per law at any place.  In absence of anything to the contrary, it has prayed that the case against O.P.2 being devoid of merit may be dismissed.
9. We have gone through the case records and heard the learned counsels from both the parties.  The complainant has availed a loan of Rs.30,000/- to defray  the study expenses of his children.  After payment of some installments, the complainant defaulted.  According to complainant his loan account No. is 7150369. He has filed the copy of the statement of the said Loan Account issued by O.P No.1 which has been marked as Annexure-7.  But surprisingly it reveals that the said loan account number as revealed from Annexure-1 in the name of the complainant is 308895.  Other detailed particulars of the said loan account remained same.  O.P.1 in his written version has categorically stated that loan account No.7150369 was erroneously mentioned in the letter dt.25.8.16 (Annexure-7) which was dispatched to the complainant.  It was a human error and quite unintentional.  It needs to be condoned.  It has also been stated that no coercive action has been taken against the complainant either by O.P.1 or O.P.2 pursuant to wrong inclusion of the said loan account No.7150369 in Annexure-7.  So far as the current loan account of the complainant is concerned, it is admitted by O.P.2 that the said loan account No. is 3380885 and it has been assigned to O.P.2 for collection.  Annexure-1 which is the statement of the said loan account does not support the averment of the complainant so far as the loan account No.7150369 is concerned.  There is no other material produced by the complainant to the contrary.   Some minor mistakes in the address of the complainant cannot disturb the position.  Hence ordered;

                                                                                                ORDER

                   In the peculiar facts and circumstances, the complainant is directed to pay the outstanding loan amount of Rs.7,152/- along with other dues, if any, to the O.P.2 in any branch of O.P.2 at Cuttack,  although the amount was written off as revealed from Annexure-2.  The O.P.2 is directed to issue No Due Certificate to the complainant on payment of the above dues.  The O.P.1 is directed to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant for the harassment and mental agony caused to him together with cost of litigation of Rs.10,000/-.

This order shall be given effect to within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble President in the Open Court on this the 14^th day of May,2019  under the seal and signature of this Forum.

                                                                                                                                                  

    (   Sri D.C.Barik )

                                                                                                                      President.

                                                             

                                                                                                

                                                                                                                (Smt. Sarmistha Nath)

                           Member(W)