Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/375/2023

EQUITAS SMALL FINANCE BANK LTD., - Complainant(s)

Versus

MR ARULDOSS - Opp.Party(s)

A DAMODARAN

21 Jul 2023

ORDER

IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI.

 

Present:   Hon’ble THIRU JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH  : PRESIDENT

                 THIRU R  VENKATESAPERUMAL          :    MEMBER

F.A. No.375/2023

(Against the Order made in C.C.No.232/2022, dated:28.02.2023 on the file of the D.C.D.R.C., Ariyalur)

 

DATED THE 21^ST DAY OF JULY 2023

 

The Manager,

Equitas Small Finance Bank Ltd.,

No.106, Sarangapani East Street,

Kumbakonam – 612 001.                   .. Appellant / Opposite party. 

 

-Versus-

Mr. Aruldass,

S/o. Mr. Kothandaram,

Naddutheru,

South Authakalam Village,

Udayarpalayam,

Ariyalur District.                               .. Respondent / Complainant.  

 

Counsel for the Appellant /

Opposite party                           : M/s. A. Damodaran

 

Counsel for the Respondent /

Complainant                              : Notice served

                               

The respondent as complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission against the opposite party praying for certain directions.  The District Commission had passed an ex-parte order, allowing the complaint. Against the said ex-parte order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party praying to set aside the order of the District Commission dt. 28.02.2023 in C.C. No.232/2022.

                This petition came before us for hearing finally, today and upon hearing the arguments of the Appellant, perusing the documents, lower court records and the order passed by the District Commission, this Commission made the following order in the open court.

ORDER

Thiru.R VENKATESA PERUMAL , MEMBER                      

        1.  The opposite party before the District Commission is the appellant herein.

        2. The case of the complainant before the District Commission is that the complainant is a farmer.   On 16.10.2020, the wife of the complainant obtained Housing Loan vide No.700000695301/EMFUMI0014950 for a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- from the opposite party.  Hence, a sum of Rs.11,421/- as EMI to be paid in 110 equated monthly instalments to the opposite party.   The complainant’s wife had taken insurance to the said loan.  For obtaining the said loan, the complainant’s wife has hypothecated the asset belongs to the complainant with the opposite party.  The complainant’s wife died on 17.07.2021.  When the complainant’s wife was alive, she had paid the EMIs promptly.   The complainant has given the death certificate of his wife with the opposite party.   But the opposite party demanded the complainant to pay the EMI amount until they receive the amount for the insurance company.  Evenafter several requests and demands, the opposite party has not come forward to cancel the loan and returned the documents pledged at the time of availing loan.  Hence, the complainant issued legal notice dt.11.05.2022 and 22.07.2022.   Though the opposite party had sent a reply, they have not come forward to comply with the demands of the complainant.  The act of the opposite party caused great mental agony.  Thus, alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party, the complainant has filed the complaint before the District Commission claiming, a sum of Rs.57,105/- being the EMIs paid for the period from 20.08.2021 to 28.12.2021 with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. to cancel the hypothecation made in the name of the complainant’s wife by the opposite party and to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony to the complainant.

3.     Though notice has been served on the opposite party, he has not chosen to appear before the District Commission and hence, the opposite party was set exparte.  Consequently, the District Commission passed an ex-parte order by directing the opposite party to refund a sum of Rs.57,105/- and to pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-.  The above amount should be paid within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of order failing which, the above amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 12% p.a..

4.     Aggrieved over the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party praying for setting aside the order and for a chance to contest the case on merits. 

5.     Before this Commission, the counsel for the appellant / opposite party submitted that there is no deficiency of service on their part.  After the appellant / opposite party had set exparte, he approached the District Consumer Commission and requested for time to file version and to contest the matter.  But the District Consumer Commission failed to restore the matter and passed orders on 28.02.2023.  Thereafter, he sought this Commission to set aside the order of the District Commission and prayed for an opportunity to contest the case on merits.

5. When the case had come up before this Commission on 07.07.2022, after hearing the submission of the appellant, this Commission had felt that there is some force in the arguments of the counsel for the appellant / opposite party and therefore, in order to give a chance to the opposite party to agitate their right on merits, was inclined to allow this appeal by remanding the matter to the District Commission, to dispose of the case on merit.   However, considering the lethargic attitude of the opposite party in not appearing before the District Commission, we imposed a cost of Rs.3,000/- to be paid to the Legal Aid Account of the State Commission on or before 20.07.2023.  Today, when the matter appeared in the list it was reported that the condition imposed by this Commission has been complied with.    Hence, this appeal is allowed today by remanding back the complaint to the District Commission for fresh disposal according to law. 

         In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the District Consumer Commission, Ariyalur in C.C. No.232/2022 dt.28.02.2023 and the matter is remanded back to the District Consumer Commission, Ariyalur for fresh disposal according to law and on merits.

 Both parties are directed to appear before the District Consumer Commission, Ariyalur on 21.08.2023 for further proceedings.  The appellant / opposite party is directed to file Vakalath, Written Version, proof affidavit, written argument and documents if any on the same day itself.

 The District Commission is directed to dispose of the complaint on merits within three months after hearing both parties as expeditiously as possible as per law.  

 Both parties shall abide by the order of the District Commission regarding the mandatory deposit already made by the appellant / opposite party before this Commission.

 

 

   R  VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                                                                    R. SUBBIAH

                 MEMBER                                                                                                                                      PRESIDENT

 

 

Index :  Yes/ No

 

KIR/SCDRC/Chennai/Orders/July/2023