Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/41/2022

1. The Branch Manager, - Complainant(s)

Versus

R. Ramani, W/o. Rangasamy, - Opp.Party(s)

M/s. A.M. Venkatakrishnan

10 Feb 2023

ORDER

 IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI.

 

Present:   Hon’ble THIRU. JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH     :     PRESIDENT

                              THIRU R VENKATESAPERUMAL :      MEMBER

 

F.A. No. 41 of 2022

(Against the order passed in E.A.No.6 of 2017 in C.C. No.260 of 2012 dated 15.10.2019 on the file of the D.C.D.R.F., Coimbatore.

 

Friday, the 10^th day of February 2023

1.  The Branch Manager

     M/s.Manapuram Financing &

        Leasing Limited

     349, 1st Floor, Saraswathi Towers

     10th Street, Gandhipuram,

     Coimbatore - 641 012.

 

2.  The General Manager

     M/s.Manapuram Financing &

        Leasing Limited

     Manapuram House

     Valapad Post, Trissur

     Kerala State.                                        

                          .. Appellants/ Judgement Debtors / Opposite Parties.

       

- Vs –

R. Ramani

W/o. Rangasamy

220-B, Cheranmaa Nagar

Coimbatore - 641 035.                                      

                                   .. Respondent/ Decree Holder / Complainant.

 

 Counsel for Appellants/ Judgement Debtors /

Opposite Parties                                      : M/s. A.M. Venkatakrishnan

 

 For the Respondent/ Decree Holder /

Complainant                                          :  Paper publication effected 

                                                                called absent

               

                This appeal has come before us for final hearing today, on 10.02.2023 and on hearing the arguments of the counsel for the Appellants/opposite parties and on perusing the material records, this Commission made the following :-

O R D E R

 

R.SUBBIAH J., PRESIDENT  (Open Court)

                1.     This appeal has been filed by the opposite parties under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as against the order passed in E.A. No.6 of 2017 in C.C. No.260 of 2012 dated 15.10.2019, by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Coimbatore, directing the appellants/ opposite parties to return back the jewels pledged by the son of the respondent/complainant on receipt of Rs.81,152/- from her. 

 

                2.  The brief facts which are necessary to decide this appeal are as follows :-

        The respondent herein had filed a complaint in C.C. No.260 of 2012 as against the appellants/opposite parties/Judgement Debtors for permitting the respondent/complainant to redeem the pledged jewels, after receiving the amount due as per the statement of accounts and also directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.10,000/- towards cost of the proceedings.  The said complaint was contested by the appellants/ opposite parties by filing a version.  The District Forum after analysing the documents and other material, allowed the complainant to redeem the gold jewels and return it to her after receiving the entire dues as per the statement of accounts and to pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony caused to the complainant due to deficiency of service and to pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards cost.  Based on the said decree, the respondent/complainant filed E.A.No.6 of 2017.  In the Execution Application both, the opposite parties and the complainant have filed their respective memo of calculation with regard to the amount to be paid by the complainant to the opposite parties for redeeming the jewels.  The complainant has given a memo of calculation as follows:-

Principal Amount                                                64,000/-

1.5% interest from Oct.2009 to 23.03.2011

(17 months and 23 days)                                   17,152/-

                                                Total                 81,152/-

        But, this memo of calculation filed by the respondent/complainant was objected by the appellants/opposite parties/judgment debtors by filing a counter objection that a sum of Rs.3,70,009/- as on 12.07.2018 is due from the respondent/complainant.  But, the District Forum had accepted the memo filed by the respondent/complainant on the reasoning that as if the memo of calculation filed by the respondent/ complainant was not objected by the appellants/opposite parties.  Aggrieved over the same, the present appeal has been filed by the appellants/opposite parties/judgment debtors. 

 

        3.  The only contention raised by the appellants/opposite parties/judgment debtors is that though a counter against the memo of calculation was filed by the appellant / opposite party, without properly considering the same, the District Forum had accepted the memo of calculation filed by the respondent/complainant as if the judgment debtor has not objected the memo of calculation filed by the respondent/ complainant.  Therefore, the order has to be set aside. 

       

        4.  There is no representation for the respondent/ complainant.  Keeping in mind the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants/opposite parties/judgment debtors, we have carefully gone through the material available on record. 

 

        5.  We find some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants/opposite parties/judgment debtors.  When an objection is filed by the opposite parties to the Memo of Calculation filed by the complainant, the District Forum ought to have discussed on the same, to arrive at an actual amount payable by the complainant.  Since it is glaringly apparent that the impugned direction has been passed in a hurried manner, without properly appreciating the memo of calculation filed by the opposite parties, we are of the considered opinion that the order of the District Forum is liable to be set aside. 

 

         6.  In the result, the Appeal is allowed by setting aside the impugned direction dated 15.10.2019 issued by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Coimbatore in E.A. No.6 of 2017 in C.C. No.260 of 2012.  Consequently, directing the said Forum to take up E.A.No.6 of 2017 and to dispose of the Application afresh on merits and in accordance with law, considering the counter calculation filed by the opposite parties.  The District Commission is directed to issue fresh notice to both the parties, fixing the date of hearing and the parties are at liberty to file further details before the District Commission to enable the District Commission to arrive at the exact amount due and payable by the complainant.  It is needless to mention that the parties shall cooperate with the District Forum for disposal of the matters.  Consequently, the Appeal is allowed.

                  

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

 

R  VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                                                               R.SUBBIAH

         MEMBER                                                                                                                                    PRESIDENT

 

 

Index :  Yes/ No

 

AVR/SCDRC/Chennai/Orders/February/2023