DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 25th day of March 2019
Present : Smt.Shiny.P.R. President
: Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member Date of filing: 27/01/2017
(C.C.No.17/2017)
Bindu.S.Chandran,
S/o A.V.Chandran,
Anthikkad House,
D.P.O Road, Palakkad. - Complainant
(Adv.K.Dhananjayan)
Vs
1. M/s Koshamattam Finance Ltd,
Regd.Office, Kosamattam MKC Building,
Market Junction, M.L.Road, Kottayam
(Rep.by Managing Director/Manager or Authorised Signatory)
2. M/S Koshamattam Finance Ltd,
Regd.Office, Kosamattam MKC Building, - Opposite parties
Market Junction, M.L.Road, Kottayam
(Rep.by Managing Director/Manager or Authorised Signatory)
3. The Manager,
Kosamattam Finance Ltd,
1st Floor, Aboo Backer Arcade,
Coimbatore Road, Sultanpet, Palakkad – 678 001.
(By Adv.Sachin Das P)
O R D E R
By Smt.Shiny.P.R, President.
Brief facts of complaint.
Complainant had pledged gold studs of 2.5 gms for an amount of Rs. 4,300/- on 21/9/2015 with 3rd opposite party. Interest offered by the firm is 20 % per annum. The 3rd opposite party issued a receipt for the same. After availing loan the complainant has approached the opposite parties for settling the loan amount by remitting the interest and also to settle the entire loan amount. But the opposite parties were not furnished any statement of accounts and also what the amount requires to pay the opposite parties to settle the entire transaction and loan. Complainant submitted that opposite party issued a notice dated 21/09/2015 alleging that the complainant has not remitted the amount after availing the loan and she has not paid its interest and renewed it. The notice further prescribes that if the complainant has not remitted the amount within 3 days, the gold ornaments pledged by the complainant would be sold in public auction. It reveals that the notice has been issued on the same day and ordered the complainant to pay the full loan amount within 3 days. The said notice is illegal, arbitrary and unjustifiable. From the endorsement of postal authorities it reveals that the notice is sent on 8-11-2016. The notice reveals that the malafide and wicked intention of the opposite parties. Complainant submitted that opposite parties have violated the Kerala Money Lenders Act, Interest Act and all other existing laws and have collected exorbitant interest, which is per se illegal and would also amount to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service. After getting notice from the opposite parties she approached the 3rd opposite party to enquire about the amount to be paid to settle the loan and to furnish the statement of account. But they have made reply to the complainant that they have already sent the ornaments to their registered office at Kottayam for necessary action to recover the loan. But they have turned a deaf ear to the complainant. Then the complainant sent a lawyer notice to the opposite parties to furnish the details of the loan. But no reply. Complainant further submitted that he is ready and willing to pay the principal loan amount which was availed by her loan with statutory interest hither to as per law. Complainant’s very genuine grievance not a mere grievance of financial loss but also the sentimental value and emotional attachment of gold and ornaments involved and inscribed in it. Hence the complaint. Complainant prays for an order directing opposite party to furnish all the details, documents and statement of account pertaining the gold loan, to produce the gold ornaments, furnish statement of account and pay Rs.10,000/- as damages for mental agony and compensation, cost of proceedings and also order the opposite parties to stop these types of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice by the opposite parties.
Complaint was admitted and notices were issued to opposite parties. After accepting the notices opposite parties entered appearance and filed version contending the following:-
Opposite parties contended that the complainant had availed a gold loan on 21/09/2015, from the opposite parties under the gold loan scheme KFL-G17,Gold Loan No.2987 by pledging gold studs weighing 2.5 gm and Rs.4,300/- was given to the complainant, after accepting the terms and conditions of the opposite party pertaining to the gold loan scheme KFL-G17 and complying the KYC (Know Your Customer) norms as mandated by the non banking supervision department of the Reserve Bank of India, Regulator of the NBFCs, the opposite parties, vide gold loan receipt number – 1980568. In the above mentioned receipt there is clear description as to the date of interest has to be paid viz 20/10/2015 and about the date of interest that had to be paid by the availed loan by the complainant. It is a practice of the opposite parties to remain the customers, in the provided mobile number, about the amount that has to be paid, to avoid the loan becoming an NPA (Non Performing Asset) and avoid the burden of accumulating interest due to the delay in repayment of loan. In the present case the complainant, had not paid a single paisa towards the principal or interest of the loan account inspite of the repeated telephonic request by the company staff. As per the norms laid down by the RBI, regulator the gold loan become an NPA, in 180 days, from the date of issue of gold loan (21/09/2015) and became an NPA on 20/06/2016, because of the nonpayment and arrogant attitude of the complainant. Without no other go, the opposite parties had issued a registered demand notice dated.19/08/2016, clearly indicating the loan number and principal amount, demanding to repay the loan amount with interest or to renew the loan after paying off the interest and with the clause that pledged ornaments will be sold in auction without further notice and proceeds will be debited from the loan amount and if there is any deficit, which will be legally realized by the opposite parties, which was returned to the opposite parties. From the postal endorsement it is clear that the complainant had evaded the statutory notice with ulterior motives and to cause hardship to the opposite parties, since the complainant was reminded by the staff of the opposite parties to repay the loan or the ornament will be sold in auction. The endorsement on the registered demand notice returned to the opposite party due to non acceptance is as follows – 23/08/2016 found door locked, 2nd intimation given on 24/08/2016 and on 27/08/2016 also founded door locked. It is evident that the complainant had received the postal intimation and preferred not to claim the registered notice of the opposite party, fully knowing the contend of the notice because of the telephonic request to close the loan or to renew the loan after paying off interest, by the staff of the opposite party. The complainant promptly received the notice and had not paid a single paisa to the loan account. Added to that the complainant and her husband came to the opposite parties Palakkad branch where the complainant pledged and took loan and created some undesirable circumstances by seeking rudely with the staff of the opposite party. As part of the statutory formalities the opposite parties had issued the registered demand notice dated.08/11/2016, clearly stating either to pay off the loan or to pay off the interest and to renew the loan. But no response was seen on the side of the opposite parties. The opposite parties had published the auction advertisement with loan account against each branch with date and time (21/11/2016, 2.00 pm) of auction was advertised “due to delay in completing the technical formalities of gold auction which was scheduled to 21/11/2016, 2.00 pm was postponed to 22/11/2016, 2.00 pm. The postponement of the gold auction was published in the venue of gold auction and on the opposite party’s website on 21/11/2016, as per the terms of gold auction published in the news paper advertisement. The auction was conducted by the gold auctioneer, 5 persons took part in the auction and the highest quote was fixed for an amount of Rs.41,15,360/- (Rupees Four Lakh Fifteen Thousand and Three Hundred and Sixty only) for 176 grams of gold, along with the gold ornaments of other 19 defaulted customers. The complainant’s ornaments weighing 2.5 grams of gold fetched Rs.5,900/- only (Rupees Five Thousand Nine Hundred only). Viz. (Rs.4,15,360/- divided b 176 grams of gold = Rs.2,360/- for a gram of gold multiplied by 2.5 grams of gold of the complainant = Rs.5,900/-). This opposite parties had completed all the mandatory legal procedures before moving to auction the ornaments pledged by the complainant. News paper advertisement dated.29/10/2016 in the Kerala Kaumudi and Deccan Chronicle dated.01/11/2016 were also been done by the opposite parties. In the KFL-G17, Gold Loan No.2987 dated.21/09/2015 availed by the complainant the total liability due to the opposite parties is Rs.5,903/- (Rupees Five Thousand Nine Hundred and Three Only) and the amount obtained through the auction of the complainant’s pledged ornaments is Rs.5,900/- (Rupees Five Thousand Nine Hundred Only). Hence, the outstanding balancing due to the opposite parties is Rs.3/-. As per the terms and conditions of the above gold loan which was duly agreed and signed the complainant is liable to make good the loss of Rs.3/- of the opposite parties. This opposite parties can legally recover such outstanding dues form the complainant. Since, the loss of the opposite parties is Rs.3/- and the cost involved is much higher, in the case of legal recovery the opposite parties had decided to write off and close the loan account. There is no deficiency of service, dereliction of duty to complainant or any unfair trade practice from the side of this opposite parties. Hence the complaint is to be dismissed with cost.
Both parties filed their respective chief affidavits and documents. Documents from the part of complainant were marked as Ext A1 to A3. Documents from the part of opposite parties were marked as Ext B1 to B9. Opposite parties filed interrogatories to the complainant and complainant filed answers in the form of affidavit.
The following issues are to be considered.
- Whether there is any deficiency in service from the part of opposite parties?
2. If so, what are the reliefs and cost?
Issues 1 & 2
Complainant has no representation for the last several chances. However in the interest of justice we have perused the documents and affidavit filed by the complainant and the matter was taken for orders after hearing opposite parties. Opposite parties admitted the gold loan availed by the complainant. Complainant submitted that opposite parties have violated the Kerala Money Lenders Act, Interest Act and all other existing laws and have collected exorbitant interest , which is per se illegal and would also amount to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service. Perusal of Ext A1 it is revealed that complainant availed loan on 21/9/2015, last date for paying interest without fine is 20/10/2015 and interest rate is 17% for first three months and after three to six months it is 20%. It also shows that both parties signed the above document. In the above circumstances we cannot say that without knowing the rate of interest complainant had pledged the ornaments with the opposite party. Opposite parties contended that the complainant had not paid a single paisa towards the principal or interest of the loan account in spite of the repeated telephonic request by the company staff. Complainant answered the question No 5 as her husband has renewed the loan by paying all the interest accrued thereon. But no documentary evidence is adduced by the complainant to prove this aspect. Ext.B 4 to Ext.B8 proved that the opposite parties have conducted the auction after fulfilling all the legal formalities required. In the above circumstances we cannot say that the notice sent by the opposite parties is illegal and opposite parties indulged in unfair trade practice and committed deficiency in service. Hence complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 25th day of March 2019.
Sd/-
Shiny.P.R.
President
Sd/-
V.P.Anantha Narayanan
Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 - Original Gold Loan Receipt No.1980568-Pledge No.2789 Account No.
KFLG/17 showing the amount of Rs.4,300 issued by opposite party
to the complainant
Ext.A2 - Original Notice issued by opposite party to the complainant
Ext.A3 series- Copy of lawyer notice sent by Advocate K.Dhananjayan to the
Opposite parties with postal receipts and acknowledgment card
Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties
Ext.B1 - Photocopy of Certificate of Registration
Ext.B2 - Photocopy of Gold Loan Receipt No.1980568 of Kosamattam Finance Ltd,
Ext.B3 Series - Original returned notice issued by Opposite party to the complainant
along with postal receipt
Ext.B4 Series - Photocopy notice issued by Opposite party to the complainant
along with postal receipt
Ext.B5 Series - Original CD along with communication received from Kerala kaumudhi
Pvt Ltd and supporting print out of the pdf news paper.
Ext.B6 series - Original Auction Advertisement published by Deccan Chronicle
dated.01.11.16 and Original BillNo.KTM/16/OP500 issued by the Valappila
Communications (P) Ltd,
Ext.B7 - Original Auction Postponement Notice
Ext.B8 series- Photocopy of Receipt of e-payment issued by Department of
Commercial Taxes to the opposite parties and auction summery
Ext.B9 - Extract of the Statement of Accounts of the complainant issued by opposite
party
Witness examined on the side of complainant
Nil
Witness examined on the side of opposite parties
Nil
Cost : Nil
