DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR
Complaint No. 663
Instituted on: 15.11.2016
Decided on: 06.04.2017
Kanwarpal Singh son of Paramjit Singh, resident of Gali No.5, Shivam Colony, Sangrur.
…. Complainant.
Versus
1. Pritpal Singh, Branch Manager, Muthoot Finance, Dhuri Gate, Sangrur.
2. Parul, Accountant, Muthoot Finance, Dhuri Gate, Sangrur.
3. Muthoot Chambers, Opposite Saritha Theater Complex, Banerjit Road, Kochi-682018 through its authorized signatory.
4. Muthoot Finance, SCO 455-456, Sector 35-C, Chandigarh-160036 through its authorized signatory.
….Opposite parties.
FOR THE COMPLAINANT: Shri Mandeep Singh, Advocate
FOR OPP. PARTIES : Shri Pritpal Singh Sidhu, Advocate
Quorum
Sukhpal Singh Gill, President
Sarita Garg, Member
Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member
ORDER:
Sukhpal Singh Gill, President
1. Shri Kanwarpal Singh, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the complainant availed the services of the Ops by obtaining a gold loan of Rs.2,40,400/- from the Ops branch Dhuri Gate, Sangrur on 10.03.2015 against ID number 008390000001213 and at that time, the complainant deposited various gold ornaments with the Ops number 1 and 2 such as (i) bangle 1 (wt.14.900 grams net wt.14.000 @ 1983/g), (ii) Ring 1 (wt. 400 grams, net wt. 6.500 g @ Rs.1983/g, (iii) Necklace 1 (wt.17.500 grams, net wt. 16.000 g @ 1983/g), (iv) chain 2 (wt. 31.300grams, net wt. 29.000 G @ 1983/g) (v) Studs 10 (wt. 39.100 grams, net wt. 35.500 G @1883/g) and (vi) locket 1 (wt. 9.500 grams, net wt. 8.000 g @ 1883/g). It is further averred that after getting the gold loan, the complainant got deposited the interest amount with the Ops in time against the proper receipt. The grievance of the complainant in the present case is that after deposit of the interest amount, he requested the Ops number 1 and 2 a number of times to get the principal amount deposited and to return the ornaments, but the Ops put off the matter on one pretext or the other. The complainant also got served legal notices dated 25.10.2016 and 26.10.2016 upon the Ops requesting them to get the principal amount deposited, but all in vain. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has prayed that the Ops be directed to get deposited the principal amount from the complainant and to release the gold ornaments to the complainant and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.
2. In reply filed by the OPs, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complainant has no privity of contract with the Branch Manager or any other employee of the OP personally and the cause of action is against the company, that the complaint is not maintainable, that the complainant is guilty of misleading the Forum and in presenting distorted version of the correct facts. The true facts are that the complainant is the customer of the OPs since the year 2010 and accordingly know your customer (KYC) document was created in the name of complainant vide ID number 00839000001213 on 25.10.2010. Further case of the Ops is that the complainant further approached the Sangrur 1st Branch of the company in September 2012 for financial assistance by way of loan facility against pledge/collateral security of his gold ornaments, accordingly, the loan amount of Rs.1,99,500/- was sanctioned to the complainant on 9.9.2012 vide account bearing number XPL-10676 against collateral security and subsequently the said loan was renewed on the request of the complainant vide account number MXL-11122, MXL-11768 and MXL-12320 on 22.12.2012, 18.5.2013 and 2.9.0213, respectively and thereafter the complainant approached the OPs on 10.3.2015 and requested for enhancement of the said loan and accordingly, the loan was enhanced to Rs.2,40,400/- on 10.3.2015 vide loan account number MXL-13678, which was subsequently renewed on the request of the complainant on 2.1.2016 and lastly on 2.10.2016 vide loan account bearing number MXL-13678 and MSL-9312. It has been further averred that the complainant also took loan from another branch i.e. Sunami Gate of the OPs vide loan account number MSL-5157 by pledging gold ornaments. The complainant had also taken loan of Rs.20,000/- from Bhawanigarh branch of the OP on 17.3.2016. Lastly, it has been stated in the written reply that if the complainant wants to repay the loan then it is open for him and he can get the ornaments released after clearance of the loan amount. However, the other allegations leveled in the complaint have been denied.
3. The complainant has tendered documents Ex.C-1 affidavit, Ex.C-2 copy of receipt dated 20.10.2016, Ex.C-3 copy of loan sanction letter and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OPs has produced Ex.OP-1 affidavit, Ex.OP-2 to Ex.OP-21 copies of various documents, such as, application form, KYC and applications etc. and closed evidence.
4. We have very carefully perused the pleadings of the parties, evidence produced on the file and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits acceptance, for these reasons.
5. From the perusal of the documents placed on the file and after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, we find that the complainant had taken a loan of Rs.2,40,400/- form the Ops on 10.3.2015 by pledging various gold ornaments as detailed in the complaint, which has not been denied by the Ops. Now, the grievance of the complainant is that though he paid the due interest to the Ops on the said loan amount in time and further wanted to deposit the principal amount with the Ops and to get released the gold ornaments, but the Ops did not allow him to deposit the same on flimsy grounds. On the other hand, the stand of the Ops is that the complainant has various loan accounts with other branches of the Ops i.e. Sunami Gate and another at Bhawanigarh, from where he had taken the loan by pledging gold with the respective branch against different loan account numbers. Now, coming to the point, in the present case, the complainant has alleged that though he has paid the interest amount against loan account number MXL-13678 and further requested the Ops to get deposited the principal amount and to release the gold ornaments pledged against this loan account, but the Ops did not bother to get deposited the loan amount and to release the gold ornaments to the complainant. The Ops have written in the written statement that the complainant has various other loan accounts with different branches such as Sunami Gate, Sangrur and at Bhawanigarh by pledging the gold ornaments. We have to do nothing against the other loan accounts, as the same are different one against pledging of the gold ornaments. There is no explanation from the side of the Ops that why the Ops did not get deposited the loan amount in one go as desired by the complainant and to release the gold ornaments pledged against the said loan account, which we feel is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of the Ops. The complainant has also produced on record the copies of the legal notices served upon the Ops for getting the amount deposited. In the circumstances, we feel that the ends of justice would be met if the Ops are directed to get deposited the remaining loan amount along with interest upto 25.10.2016 (date of issuance of the legal notices to the Opposite parties number 1 and 2) and to release the gold ornaments pledged against the disputed loan account MXL-13678.
6. In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the Ops to get deposited the remaining loan amount against loan account number MXL-13678 along with interest upto 25.10.2016 from the complainant and to release the gold ornaments pledged against the said loan account. We further order the OPs to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.10,000/- on account of compensation and further Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses.
7. This order of ours shall be complied with within 30 days from the receipt of copy of the order. A copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.
Pronounced.
April 6, 2017.
(Sukhpal Singh Gill)
President
(Sarita Garg)
Member
(Vinod Kumar Gulati)
Member
