Order-22.
Date-20/10/2016.
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
Case of the complainant, in short, is that he approached the OP being in requirement of cash loan and after complying the official formalities the gold loan was advanced to the complainant against pledge of gold ornaments that pledged. OP also issued receipts as against the said transaction. The complainant continued to make payments on yearly basis for last several years and the OP also issued new receipts and took back the old receipts. OP lastly on 16-07-2014 in similar manner issued loan sanctioned receipt dated 16-07-2014 for loan no.039794. In the end of January, 2016, the complainant received a letter from the OP threatening to make payment of Rs.4,85,051/- on or before 13-02-2016 otherwise the gold ornaments signing pledge as collateral security would be auction on 15-02-2016 at the address of the OP at Gariahat Branch or on 19-02-2016 at the address of OP at Camac Street Branch the complainant was thunderstruck on receiving such letter and immediately contacted the Branch Manager of OP at Gariahat Branch over telephone and enquired about such quersive step but no reasonable reply was given by the said branch. The complainant also issued a letter dated 01-02-2016 but the OPs remained silent. The complainant once again wrote to the OP over email on 15-02-2016 but to no good. It is also stated that the complainant had visited the OPs office for depositing interest during the year 2010 and 2011 but OPs made them signed on some more papers stating, inter alia, that since there has been increase in the value of gold in the market they enhanced the loan amount of the complainant and the ops are in requirement of proper documentation for keeping a record of such press hike. But complainant further case is that he is in total darkness as to where all the money paid by the complainant has been siphoned off by the ops. It is alleged that the OPs have indulged in unfair trade practice. The complainant also proposed a reasonable opportunity to make payment of the interest and margin money as he has been paying up for last several years. The complainant has also prayed for stay of the auction sell of the complainant’s gold ornaments by the OP scheduled to be held on 19-0-2016. Hence, this case.
In filing written version OPs have contested the case contending, inter alia, that the applicant availed one loan from the OP Company being Loan Account No.MSL – 039794 dated 16-07-2014. 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. The applicant had failed and neglected to repay the said loan and had committed defaults. The OPs also issued demand notices, inter alia, calling upon the complainant to repay the said loan but the complainant did not respond to the said notice. Secondly the OP company was constrained to issue legal notice dated 27-02-2016 calling upon the complainant to repay the outstanding dues in respect of the said loan. But the complainant did not make the repayment as against the said loan. It is also stated that the complainant avoided to pay the outstanding dues in respect of the said loan. It is alleged that the complainant has initiated the instant case with mala fide intention with an ulterior motive. It is also stated by the OP that the relationship between the complainant and the OP is that of a Pawnor and Pawnee. The OP is a non-banking finance company. It is alleged that the proceeding does not fall within the definition or ambit or scope of consumer dispute as envisaged in Section 2(1)(c) of the C.P. Act. This O has prayed accordingly for dismissal of the case.
Point for Decision
- Whether the OPs are guilty of unfair trade practice or deficiency of service?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.
Decision with Reasons
We have perused the petition of complaint, written version and other materials on record including the legal notice from the side of the OP to the complainant. It appears that the complainant availed one loan from the OP company under Loan Account No.MSL 039794 dated 16-07-2016 amounting to Rs.4,03,600/-. As per the terms of the said loan the complainant had pledged with ornaments in respect of the said loan as collateral security thereby securing the repayment of the said loan. But it appears that the complainant had failed to repay the said loan and had committed defaults. Legal Notice dated 23-01-2016 was also served upon the complainant calling upon the complainant to repay the said loan. We find that the relationship between the complainant and the OP is that of a “pawnor and pawnee”. It appears that the complainant has pledged gold ornaments as collateral security for the purposes of securing the repayment of loan availed by her from the OP. It also appears that the complainant has admitted that he is a defaulter and that he has received a notice regarding in India auctions of the pledged ornaments. We find that the tenure of the said loan expired on 15-07-2015. So, we think that the said loan amount along with interest is repayable to the OP. The complainant is a gross defaulter, in fact, the loan tenure has also expired on 15-07-2015. We, however, also given anxious thought over the pecuniary distress of the complainant. Considering the facts and circumstances and having regard to the financial crisis of the complainant, we feel inclined to pass the order as follows.
Hence,
Ordered
That the instant case be and the same is allowed on contest in part against the OPs.
Complainant is directed to liquidate the loan amount involved in this case along with accrued interest at the agreed rate within one month from the date of this order. The OP is directed to return the pledged gold ornaments to the complainant on refund of the loan amount along with interest by the complainant.
OP is restrained from sell/auction the pledged ornaments for the purpose of recovering his dues till the said period.
In the facts and circumstances, we make no order as to cost.
Failure to comply with the order will entitle either of the parties to put the order into execution u/s.25 read with Section 27 of the C.P. Act.
