ORDER

Complaint under  Sec.12 of the CPA 1986 as amended upto date

Ms. Nipur Chandna, Member

          Complainant had taken a loan for a sum of Rs.36,000/- on 19.11.2008 against gold i.e. bangles and chain from the OP vide receipt no. 16021 dated 19.11.2008 with loan No. 0005469.

It is alleged by the complainant that at the time of disbursing loan the OP had disclosed all their term and condition according to which he had to pay interest on due date, and in case there is a delay 0.25% will be charged extra quarterly from the date of loan. He visited the office of the OP in the year 2011 to settle the matter.  The OP flatly refused to settle the matter and informed him that his god ornaments has been forfeited as per clause no. 2 of the agreement entered into between the parties.

It is further alleged by the complainant that the OP has no authority to sell his gold ornaments worth Rs.1 lac against the loan of Rs.36,000/-.  He visited the office of the OP several times to resolve the issue but of no vain.

He has also lodged a complaint against OP company at P.S. Desh Bandhu Gupta Road, Karol Bagh, but no action has been taken against OP by them.

The Complainant therefore approached the Hon’ble Forum for the redressal of his grievance.

OP has contested the complaint and has filed W.S. Para No. 1 of the preliminary objection of W.S. filed by the OP is relevant and the same is reproduced as under: -

1. That the complainant had availed one loan from the Respondent Company being loan account No. PPL0005469 dated 19.11.2008, in the sum of Rs.35,000/-  As per the terms of the said loan, the complainant had pledged gold ornaments in respect of the said loan as and by way of collateral security thereby securing the repayment of the said loan.  However, in utter defiance of the terms of the repayment of the said loan, the complainant had failed/avoided/neglected to repay the said loan and had committed defaults. The Respondent was therefore constrained to issue demand notices inter-alia notice dated 19.8.2009 thereby calling upon the complainant to repay the said loan.,  However, the complainant did not respond to the said notice.  Consequently the respondent company was constrained to issue a legal notice dated 10.6.2010, to the complainant through its counsel, vide speed post, calling upon the complainant to repay the outstanding dues in respect of the said loan.  It had been further specified in the said notice that in case the complainant did not make the repayment in respect of the said on or before 25.6.2010 then in that event the Respondent shall be constrained to sell/auction/dispose off the pledged ornaments in the public auction, being conducted on 26.6.2010.  However, despite the said notice the Complainant failed/avoided to pay the outstanding dues in respect of the said loan.  As such the Respondent company was constrained to sell/dispose off/auction the said ornaments, in the public auction, and adjusted the realized amount against the dues payable in respect of the said loan account.  Thus the captioned complaint is without any cause of action and is liable to be dismissed.

     Both the parties have filed their evidence by way of affidavits.

    We have heard the arguments advanced at the bar and have perused the record.

     The counsel for the OP has contended that the complainant had availed of a loan of Rs.36,000/- from the OP .  However, the complainant had failed to repay the said loan and as such OP was constrained to issue demand notice dated 19.8.2009 thereby calling upon the complainant to repay the said loan.  The complainant did not respond to the said notice, and as such OP company issued a legal notice dated 10.6.2010 calling upon the complainant to repay the outstanding dues, specifying in it that if he fails to respond to their notice, then the OP company will be at liberty to auction the pledged ornaments  on 20.6.2010 to recover the amount due from the complainant.

     The complainant did not respond to the above notice and as such the OP company was constrained to auction the pledged ornaments and had adjusted the realized amount against dues payable in respect of the aforesaid loan.

     The counsel for the OP company has placed on record the copy of pledge form (Agreement )the copy of demand notice dated 19.8.2009, the copy of the legal notice dated 10.6.2010.  He has also placed on record the copy of relevant documents pertaining to the auction of the pledged ornaments in support of his aforesaid contention. 

     The counsel for the OP has prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.

     In view of the stand taken by the OP and the documents placed on record, we are of the considered opinion that the OP had acted within the four corners of law.  Complainant had failed to place on record any document which shows that at any point of time he had made any payment due against the aforesaid loan to the OP.  We therefore, see no merits in this complaint.  Same is hereby dismissed.

          Copy of the order be made available to the parties as per rule.

 File be consigned to record room.

Announced in open sitting of the Forum on.....................