Delhi

East Delhi

CC/938/2012

SUBHASH CHAND - Complainant(s)

Versus

MUTHOOT FINANCE - Opp.Party(s)

11 Dec 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

C.C. NO. 938/12

 

Shri Subhash Chand

S/o Shri Duli Chand

R/o H. No. B-61, 60 Ft. Road

Dilshad Colony, Delhi – 110 095                                                  ….Complainant

 

Vs.

 

M/s. Muthoot Finance Ltd.

(Branch Code 1625)

Ashish Corporate Tower

Karkardooma Community Centre

Karkardooma, Delhi

Through its Branch Manager/In-charge                                            ….Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 09.11.2012

Judgment Reserved on: 11.12.2017

Judgment Passed on: 13.12.2017

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari  (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

JUDGEMENT

          The present complaint pertains to allegations of deficiency in service by the complainant, Shri Subhash Chand against M/s. Muthoot Finance Ltd. (OP).

2.       Facts in brief are that the complainant took the loan of               Rs. 95,500/- on 14.03.2012 vide PPL no. 1640 from M/s. Muthoot Finance Ltd. (OP), against the gold jewellery in the shape of four pieces of bangles, weighing around 48.090 gms., which were purchased on 29.09.2007 from M/s. P.P. Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. vide retail invoice bearing TIN No. 07970164692.

          It was stated that on 14.03.2012, the complainant repaid the said loan by paying the total sum of Rs. 96,020/- for which OP issued the receipt bearing no. 3988460 dated 14.03.2012.  At the time of return, the complainant noticed that the physical condition and shape of the bangles was totally damaged and distorted.  OP assured the complainant to get the bangles repaired for its restoration in the earlier condition which was duly endorsed on the back of the slip dated 14.03.2012, the said four bangles were being retained for the purpose of repair.

          It was further stated that it was not possible to repair the bangles and to bring the same in their original shape and condition.  The staff of OP agreed to give Rs. 2,000/-, but the complainant declined to accept the same.  The complainant sent a legal notice dated 16.05.2012 to OP which was not replied

          It was stated that present value of the bangles was around                 Rs. 1,44,000 and making charges at the present market rate came to around Rs. 15,000/-.  Hence, the complainant has prayed for directions to OP to pay Rs. 15,000/- towards making charges of bangles alongwith 18% interest; Rs. 10,000/- compensation on account of mental agony and harassment and cost of litigation. 

Complainant has annexed receipt bearing no. 3988460 dated 14.03.2012, invoice of P.P. Jewellers dated 29.09.2007, postal receipts and copy of legal notice alongwith complaint.  

3.       Notice of the complaint was given to OP which was served; however, they did not put the appearance.  Hence, they have been proceeded ex-parte.

4.       In support of its complaint, the complainant have examined himself.  He has deposed on affidavit.  He has narrated the contents of the complaint.  He has stated to have exhibited documents such as copy of loan agreement (Ex.CW-1/1), receipt bearing no. 3988640 dated 14.03.2012 (Ex.CW-1/2), legal notice as well as postal receipts (Ex.CW-1/3) and (Ex.CW-1/4) respectively.

5.       We have heard the submissions on behalf of the complainant and Ld. Counsel for OP.  The complainant has alleged that the four gold bangles pledged by him with OP have been damaged and in his support, he has placed on record the receipt bearing endorsement “04 bangles kept with us for repair, to be delivered after same are repaired to the satisfaction of client”.  As OP has been proceeded ex-parte, the allegations against them have remained unrebutted.  However, upon inquiry, it was submitted by the counsel for OP that as a matter of practice in order to check the purity of pledged articles, a sample from the article is taken.

          The complainant has placed nothing on record to substantiate the estimated cost of making as alleged.  However, considering the endorsement, we allow the present complaint and direct OP to pay     Rs. 20,000/- as lump sum which shall include making charges as well as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony.    

            Copy of the order `be supplied to the parties as per rules.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                                (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

Member                                                                                  Member  

           

 

            (SUKHDEV SINGH)

             President