Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/379/2013

V.Ramalingam - Complainant(s)

Versus

Personal Finance Chennai - Opp.Party(s)

K.Murugan

15 Dec 2022

ORDER

                                              Date of Complaint Filed : 27.11.2013

                                              Date of Reservation      : 29.11.2022

                                              Date of Order               : 15.12.2022

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                                 : PRESIDENT

                       THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,                 :  MEMBER  I 

                        THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,         : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 379/2013

THURSDAY, THE 15th DAY OF DECEMBER 2022

Mr. V. Ramalingam,

S/o. Venkatasamy,

No.45-2B, Netta Pakkam Main Road,

Nettapakkam Post,

Pondicherry 605 106.                                                                                                              ... Complainant              

 

..Vs..

The Manager,

Personal Finance-Chennai,

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited,

No.39, 1st Floor, Ceebros Center,

Montieth Road, Egmore,

Chennai – 600 008.                                                                                                                     ...  Opposite Party

******

Counsel for the Complainant        : M/s. K. Murugan

Counsel for the Opposite Party     : M/s. Nathan and Associates

 

On perusal of records and upon treating the written arguments as oral arguments on endorsement made by the Opposite Party, we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by the President Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to direct the Opposite Party to issue the personal loan full closure letter (No due certificate) in loan Agreement No.CSG-2373070 dated 29.09.2008 to the Complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony caused to the Complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards cost of this complaint.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

The Complainant had borrowed personal loan for a sum of Rs.15,12,083/- vide personal Loan Agreement No. CSG 2373070 dated 29.09.2008 from the Opposite Party which is to be repaid in 36 months from 10.11.2008 to 10.11.2011 on monthly installment of Rs.55,863/- each month.  After paying the entire amount the Complainant has given letter to the Opposite Party on 21.11.2011 requesting them to issue no due certificate but the same was not considered.  Again on 27.12.2011 the Complainant  gave a letter to issue no due certificate, for which the Opposite Party had given statement of account dated 27.12.2011 informing the Complainant that he has to pay a sum of Rs.1,11,719/-. Believing the words of the Opposite Party, the Complainant has paid the aforesaid due through post dated cheques bearing No.024287 dated 31.01.2012 and 024286 dated 31.12.2011 for a sum of Rs.55,863/-each and the same was presented and cleared by the Opposite Party.  After receiving the above payments the Opposite Party has not issued no due certificate to the Complainant and hence the Complainant had sent a letter on 23.03.2012 but the same was not replied by the Opposite Party. Further the Complainant had issued legal notice dated 04.11.2013 calling upon the Opposite Party to issue no due certificate in respect of the Personal loan availed by the Complainant which was also received by the Opposite Party. The act of the Opposite Party is nothing but deficiency of service which caused mental agony and monetary loss to the Complaintant. Hence the complaint.

3. Written Version filed by the Opposite Party in brief is as follows:-

The Opposite party submitted that the Complainant has borrowed a Personal Loan for a sum of Rs.15,12,083/- from the Opposite Party which ought to be paid within 36 months from 10.11.2008 to 10.11.2011 on the basis of monthly installment of Rs.55,863/-. Further submitted that there is pendency of penal charges yet to be collected from the Complainant which the Opposite Party is authorized to do so as per the norms of the Reserve Bank of India. Further submitted that the Opposite Party has duly replied to the letters of the Complainant being a reputed financial institution known all over the world but the same is not available to be produced due to the fact that they had been change of concerned officer and due to this reason they are unable to trace the letters. The cheques towards the monthly installment has been dishonored several times which attracts penal charges and the details are provided in the statement of accounts.  The Complainant has failed to repay the penal charges due to the Opposite Party. It is pertinent to known that as per the loan agreement No.CSG 2373070 dated 29.09.2008 entered between the Complainant and the Opposite Party there is a clause 11.16 in the said loan agreement where it was agreed to settle all claims and disputes arising out of the loan to be settled through arbitration. As the penal charges are pending no due certificate cannot be provided. Hence to dismiss the complaint.

  

4.   The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents were marked as  Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-12. The Opposite Party submitted its Written Version and Proof Affidavit on the side of Opposite Party, document was marked as Ex.B-1 alone.

Points for Consideration

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled to?

Point No.1:

The undisputed facts are that the Complainant had availed Personal Loan from the Opposite Party for a sum of Rs.15,12,083/- vide personal loan agreement No.CSG-2373070 dated 29.09.2008 which is to be repaid in 36 equated monthly installment of Rs.55,860/- commencing from 10.11.2008 to 10.11.2011. The dispute arose when the Opposite Party failed to issue no due certificate even after receiving payment of the entire amount towards the personal loan availed by the Complainant.

        The contention of the Complainant is that after clearing the entire installments amounts he had given a letter to the Opposite Party on 21.11.2011 requesting the Opposite Party to issue no due certificate as found in Ex.A-3.  However the  statement of account dated 27.12.2011 issued by the Opposite Party, Ex.A-5 reflects balance amount of Rs.1,11,719/- to be paid by the Complainant.  Accordingly, the Complainant had paid the due amount of Rs.1,11,719/- through post dated cheques bearing No.024287 dated 31.01.2012 and 024286 dated 31.12.2011 each for a sum of Rs.55,863/- which amounts were encashed by the Opposite Party as evident from Ex.A-9, the Bank statement of the Complainant .

        The Opposite Party contended that as on 31.01.2012 a sum of Rs.1,66,214/- was the outstanding amount payable by the Complainant. As the Complainant failed to make payment towards the outstanding amount he is not entitled for the no due certificate.

        The Complainant having paid the entire amount as per the repayment schedule dated 07.10.2008, Ex.A-2 had sought for no due certificate vide letter dated 21.11.2011 and 27.12.2011, Exs.A-3 and Ex.A-4.  The Opposite Party had issued a statement of account dated 27.12.2011 showing a balance amount of Rs.1,11,719/- which amount was duly repaid by the Complainant as found in Ex.A-9.  After paying the balance amount the Complainant has given a requisition letter on 23.03.2013 seeking no due certificate,  but the Opposite Party failed to issue no due certificate or give any reply to the letter of the Complainant. Inspite of receipt of the legal notice dated 04.11.2013 issued by the Complainant, the Opposite Party failed to respond.  Even in the present case the Opposite Party remained exparte and an order was passed by this Commission allowing the complaint in part. Against which the Opposite Party preferred F.A.No.317/2017, wherein the Hon’ble State Commission has allowed the appeal by its order dated 22.07.2022 and remanded the case to this Commission for fresh disposal on merits. Subsequently, the Opposite Parties had filed written version alleging that the Complainant had to pay penal charges and a sum of Rs.1,66,214/- which was due and payable as on 31.01.2012.  The Opposite Party had also filed a Statement of Accounts Ex.B-1 which shows the total payable by the Complainant as on 23.03.2022 was Rs.60,89,857.69.

        The Complainant had cleared all the dues to the Opposite Party as on 31.01.2012, inspite of which the Opposite Party had not issued no due certificate on the contrary the Opposite Party is claiming a huge amount of Rs.60,89,857.69 as due and payable by the Complainant as on 23.08.2022 as seen from Ex.B-1. The alleged due of Rs.1,66,214/- had been multiplied several times in a few years showing a balance outstanding of Rs.60,89,857.69 which is arbitrary.

The Opposite Party placed reliance on the Judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed on 18.04.2017 in Jaswinder Kaur (Deceased) Vs. Gurmal Singh, which deals with the suit for specific performance and of the readiness and willingness in performance of contract, which is no way connected to the present case at hand.

        The act of the Opposite Party in not issuing the no due certificate even after collecting the entire due amount from the Complainant in the month of January 2012 itself and though the written Version filed by the Opposite Party does not mention any specific amount as due and payable by the Complainant the Statement of Accounts, Ex.B-1 reflects a huge amount of Rs.60,89,857.69 as the total payable by the Complainant which is arbitrary and amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service, on the part of the Opposite Party. Accordingly, Point No.1 is answered.

Point Nos.2 and 3:-

As discussed and decided in Point No.1 the Opposite Party is directed to issue no due certificate in respect of loan agreement No.CSG-2373070 dated 29.09.2008 to the Complainant and to pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- towards unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party along with Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation. Accordingly Point Nos. 2 and 3 are answered.

In the result, the complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite Party is   directed to issue No Due Certificate in respect of Loan Agreement No.CSG-2373070 dated 29.09.2008 to the Complainant and to pay  a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) towards  compensation for the unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party along with litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) to the Complainant, within 8 weeks from the date receipt of this order, failing which the above amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a from the date of receipt of this order till the date of realisation.

          In the result this complaint is allowed.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 15th of December 2022.

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

 List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1

14.10.2008

Loan Agreement

Ex.A2

07.10.2008

Loan Repayment Schedule

Ex.A3

21.11.2011

Letter for No due certificate

Ex.A4

27.12.2011

Letter for No due certificate

Ex.A5

27.12.2011

Statement of Accounts

Ex.A6

27.12.2011

Cash flow Details

Ex.A7

31.01.2012

State Bank of Travancore, Cheque

Ex.A8

31.12.2011

State Bank of Travancore, Cheque

Ex.A9

08.02.2013

Complainant Bank Statement

Ex.A10

23.03.2013

Letter for No Due Certificate

Ex.A11

04.11.2013

Legal Notice

Ex.A12

06.11.2013

Postal Acknowledgement Card

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Party                                                            

Ex.B1

23.08.2022

Kotak Mahindra Statement of Account

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                    B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.