Complaint presented on : 20.12.2013
Order pronounced on : 31.03.2015
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L., : PRESIDENT
TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L., : MEMBER II
TUESDAY THE 31th DAY OF MARCH 2015
C.C.NO.245/2013
Lal Chand Ramesh Vasumal Lalchand,
No.4, Central Street Kilpauk Garden Colony,
Chennai 600 010.
.. Complainant
..Vs..
| | 1Phoenix Arc Private Ltd., Rep by its Authorised Signatory, Registered Office, 7th Floor, Dani Corporate Park, 158, C.S.T. Road, Kalina, Santacruz (E) Mumbai 400 098. 2. Phoenix Aec Private Ltd., Rep by its Authorised Signatory, No.3, 2nd Floor, Dass India Towers, Second Line Beach, Parrys, Chennai – 600 001. | |
| | | .. Opposite parties |
| | |
Date of complaint : 27.12.2013
Counsel for Complainant :Mrs.N.Premalatha
Counsel for 1st & 2nd Opposite party : M/s S.Namasivayam,
R.Balambigai Gowri
O R D E R
BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.SC., B.L.,
This complaint is filed by the complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.
COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:
1.The complainant availed a personal loan from Barclays Bank on 26.08.2008 for a sum of Rs.5,00,000 agreeing to repay the said amount in 36 EMI at the rate of Rs.18,838/- per month. The complainant paid 20 installments regularly and after that he approached the said bank for one time settlement. The bank accepted the offer of the complainant and issued a letter of settlement dated 28.06.2011 asking him, to pay an amount of Rs.1,32,000/- in 6 months. Accordingly the complainant also paid the said amount as follows.
- Paid a sum of Rs.15,700/- on 30.06.2011
- Paid a sum of Rs.15,000/- on 29.07.2011
- Paid a sum of Rs. 15,000/- on 29.08.2011
- Paid a sum of Rs. 28,766/- on 29.09.2011
- Paid a sum of Rs. 28,767/- on 29.10.2011
- Paid a sum of Rs. 28,750/- on 28.11.2011
2.The complainant discharged the entire liability as per the settlement and hence there is no due to be paid by the complainant to the Barclays bank. On 18.01.2013 the complainant received a letter from the 1st opposite party/bank that the loan amounts remains unpaid , the complainant send a reply on 07.03.2013 that he had paid the entire amount due to the bank. However the 1st opposite party issued a legal notice dated 1.04.2013 claiming an amount of Rs.1,50,563/- due to them. Then the complainant sent a reply on 17.04.2013 that he had paid the entire amount. Again the opposite party sent another legal notice dated 20.06.2013 claiming the same amount and he can also have a touch with one Sibu Baby at Chennai. When the complainant contacted the Chennai office they informed the settlement become null and void in view of that the complainant had paid Rs.17/- short in the last installment. After that only the complainant came to know that he has paid Rs.17/- short in the 6th installment. The complainant sent a legal notice to the opposite party on 15.07.2013 that he had paid the entire amount. He has not received any reply from the bank , however he received a notice of arbitration proceedings. Then complainant wrote a letter a dated 29.08.2013 explaining the situation. Again the complainant received final notice dated 31.08.2013 in respect of arbitration. Though complainant sent many letters and e-mails arbitration award was passed on 10.10.2013. The complainant is due only a shortage of Rs. 17/- in respect of his personal loan account and not more than that amount . The opposite parties are guilty of unfair trade practice by making false statement and accounts. The act of opposite party harassment and mental agony to the Complainant. Therefore the complainant filed this complaint claiming compensation and cost of the complaint .
3.WRITTEN VERSION IN BRIEF:
The 1st and 2nd opposite party are asset reconstruction company and in their course of business they acquired the business of Barclays Bank through their assignment deed dated 30.03.2011. The complainant availed a personal loan of an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- from the Barclays Bank agreeing to repay in 36 installments at the rate of 18,838/- per month. The complainant was irregular in payment. It was specifically mentioned in the One Time Settlement that any failure to adhere strictly to the terms of the settlement shall make the settlement non-est in law and the borrower is bound by the usual terms and conditions of the facility. He did not follow the terms of the Settlement and rendered himself ineligible for the one time settlement and dues are calculated as per the terms and conditions of facility. Therefore the dispute was referred to arbitration as provided in the agreement and an award was passed for the amount payable. Opposite parties have not violated the terms and conditions and there is no deficiency of service and the complainant is not entitled to any relief.
4.POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:
1.Whether the opposite parties 1 and 2 committed Deficiency in service?
2. To what relief the complainant is entitled?
5.POINT:1
It is an admitted fact that the complainant borrowed a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as personal loan from the Barclays Bank agreeing to repay in 36 equal installments at the rate of Rs. 18,838/- per month and accordingly complainant paid 20 installments and there after, he approached the Barclays Bank for one time settlement and the said Bank issued Ex.A11 settlement letter dated 28.06.2011 to pay in 6 installments and accordingly, the complainant paid the 6 installment amounts under ExA12 receipts and subsequently the opposite party 1,2 acquired the business of Barclays Bank by an assignment deed dt.30.03.2011 and the opposite party 1,2 also written Ex A1 letter to the complainant about the assignment of Barclays bank in their favour.
6.The 1st opposite party mentioned in Ex A1 that the complainant is still in arrears of loan and advised him to pay entire outstanding dues immediately. The complainant replied through ExA2 e-mail with settlement letter that the account closed long back. Then the opposite party 1 issued ExA3 legal notice dated 01.04.2013 that the complainant as on date a sum of Rs.1, 50,563/- is due and payable by him. The complainant sent Ex.A4 e-mail dated 17.04.2013 that he is unable to understand when the whole amount has been settled by him and how can opposite party claim an outstanding of Rs.1,50,563/- is still pending. Again opposite party 1 sent Ex.A5 legal notice dated 20.06.2013 reiterating their stand that the complainant is still due to pay to the opposite party. However, the complainant gave Ex.A6 reply dated 15.07.2013 through his lawyer that he had paid entire amount to Barclays Bank and he is not due to pay any amount. Ex A7 is the 2nd arbitration notice and Ex A9 notice addressed to the complainant from the arbitrator and Ex.A10 is the award of the arbitration for a sum of Rs.1, 50,563/- payable by the complainant.
7.The complainant pleaded in the complaint that he came to know only on 28.11.2011 that he has paid Rs.28,750/- in the 6th installment with a short of Rs.17/- to the Barclays Bank. The opposite party would contend that since the complainant paid deficit of Rs.17/- in the 6th installment, he had committed default in payment as per Ex A11and Ex.B3 settlement and as per terms of settlement if any payment missed would make the settlement offer null and void. The complainant categorically admitted in the complaint that he had paid Rs.17/- short in the 6th installment and when this fact came to his knowledge, the complainant did not come forward to pay Rs.17/- to opposite parties with interest according to his own calculation and without paying Rs.17/- by rectifying the default payment the complainant filed the complaint that the opposite parties committed deficiency in service and on that basis claiming compensation is not acceptable.
8.The complainant is due to pay Rs.17/- is a default committed by the complainant towards payment of installments to the opposite parties or Barclays Bank, whether such amount is a meager amount or not. The version of the opposite parties are that the complainant is due to pay Rs.1,50,563/- is a correct amount or not is not to be decided in this complaint. On his own admission of complainant that he has committed default of payment of Rs.17/- in the 6th installment. In view of such admission of default of payment of the complainant that, the complainant has not proved that the opposite party 1 and 2 committed deficiency in service and accordingly this point is answered.
9.POINT:2
Since it is held in point no 1 that the opposite party had not committed deficiency in service, the complainant is not entitled for any relief in this complaint.
In the result the complaint is dismissed without cost.
Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 31th day of March 2015.
MEMBER - II PRESIDENT
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:
Ex.A1 dated 18.01.2013 Letter of Opposite Parties
Ex.A2 dated 01.03.2013 E-Mail of the complainant
Ex.A3 dated 01.04.2013 Legal Notice of the Opposite parties
Ex.A4 dated 17.04.2013 Reply Letter of the complainant with
Acknowledgement
Ex.A5 dated 20.06.2013 Reminder Notice of opposite parties
Ex.A6 dated 15.07.2013 Reply notice of the complainant
Ex.A7 dated 31.07.2013 Second Notice of Arbitration proceedings
Ex.A8 dated 29.08.2013 Reply Letter of the complainant
Ex.A9 dated 31.08.2013 Third & Final Notice of Arbitration proceedings
Ex.A10 dated 19.10.2013 Letter of OP enclosing Arbitration Award
Ex.A11 dated 28.06.2011 Settlement Letter of Barclays Bank
Ex.A12 dated 30.06.2011, 28.11.2011 Six Loan Repayment Receipts
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTIES:
Ex.B1 dated Authorized Signatory
Ex.B2 dated 26.06 2011 Settlement Letter
Ex.B3 dated Copies of Receipts as per payments made
MEMBER - II PRESIDENT
