Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/214/2012

T.Natarajan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Reepco Home Finance ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Jayasubha Associates

10 Apr 2019

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 19.06.2012

                                                                          Date of Order : 10.04.2019

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP. : MEMBER

 

C.C. No.214/2012

DATED THIS WEDNESDAY THE 10^TH DAY OF APRIL 2019

                                 

T. Nagarajan,

S/o. Mr. Thimmaraj,

No.44, West Mada Street,

Maduravoyal,

Chennai – 600 095.                                                      .. Complainant.                                                

 

                                                                                           ..Versus..

 

1. M/s. Repco Home Finance Ltd.,

Rep. by its Executive Director,

Corporate Office at:-

2^nd Floor, Karumuthu Centre,

No.634, Anna Salai,

Chennai – 600 035. 

 

2. The Branch Manager,

Repco Bank,

Ashok Nagar Branch,

Chennai – 600 083.                                                 ..  Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the complainant                  : M/s. Jayasubha Associates  

                                                                  & others

Counsel for the opposite parties 1 & 2 : M/s. Nithysh Sekhar &   

                                                                 others

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainants against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 pray to credit a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- along with applicable interest since 19.04.2012 to till the date of realization and to pay Rs.3,50,000/- towards compensation for the loss and mental agony with cost to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he has availed housing loan for a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- on 24.07.2006 from the 2^nd opposite party in the year 2006.  The said loan amount shall be repayable in 120 equal monthly instalments at the rate of Rs.33,038/- per month with interest at the rate of 11.25% per annum.  While so, the 2^nd opposite party required an office at Maduravoil to open its branch.   After negotiation, the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties agreed the complainant’s building and entered into a lease agreement with the complainant on 01.10.2009 with effect from 01.11.2009 to 31.12.2012.   The demised lease property also situated in No.44, the 1^st Floor,  West Mada Street, Maduravoyal, Chennai – 600 095.  The plinth area is 1,250 sq. ft.  The 1^st opposite party paid an advance of Rs.1,50,000/-.    As per the clause 4 of the lease agreement, the said advance shall be adjusted towards the rent for the last 10 months.   Thereby, the opposite parties shall pay rent regularly.  But on 19.02.2011, the 2^nd opposite party sent a notice to the complainant stating that they have prepared to revoke the lease agreement and they wanted to vacate the premises on 28.02.2011 and requested the complainant  to pay the advance amount of Rs.1,50,000/-.  The complainant submits that from 19.02.2011, the 2^nd opposite party has not paid any rent and maintenance charges till the end of the lease period and even after more than a year.   The opposite parties has not vacated the leased premises and not even handed over the key of the building.   But suddenly, without any information, the 2^nd opposite party debited a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from the account of the complainant vide cheque No.008774 issued towards security for the home loan fraudulently affixing the date 19.04.2012.   The complainant submits that even after issue of legal notice dated:07.05.2012, the opposite parties has  not come forward to settle the issue amicably.  The act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice which caused great mental agony.  Hence, the complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by opposite parties is as follows:

The opposite parties specifically deny each and every allegations made in the complaint and put the complainant to strict proof of the same.     The opposite parties state that the complainant has availed loan of Rs.25,00,000/- on 24.07.2006.  It should be repayable in 120 equal instalments with the interest at the rate of 11.25%.  The allegation that the opposite parties had demanded blank cheques from the complainant and the complainant issued blank cheques towards security are absolutely false.    The opposite parties state that the opposite parties entered into a rental agreement with the complainant commencing from 01.11.2009 to 31.01.2012.   A sum of Rs.1,50,000/- paid towards advance.  The monthly rent is Rs.15,000/-.   The opposite parties state that they have decided to close the Maduravoil Branch and the staffs were transferred to another branches and sent notice of termination of rental agreement on 19.02.2011.  For which, the complainant sent reply dated:21.02.2011 to continue the premises till the end of the lease period.  The complainant has no right to compel the opposite parties to continue the tenancy.  As per clause 22 of Tenancy Agreement, three months notice shall be given. But notice dated:19.02.2011 terminating the tenancy by 28.02.2011 which is totally against the terms and conditions.  Three months time has not been given by the opposite parties towards termination of tenancy.   The opposite parties shall pay rent upto end of April 2011 also.  The opposite parties state that they have vacated the building at the end of February 2011.  The opposite parties state that there is no relationship with the complainant and opposite parties as Consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The opposite parties state that the compensation claimed is imaginary and exorbitant.  Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A9 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is filed and documents Ex.B1 to Ex.B6 are marked on the side of the opposite parties 1 & 2.  

4.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- along with interest as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- towards compensation for loss and mental agony with cost as prayed for?

5.      On point:-

Both parties filed their respective written arguments.  Heard the opposite party’s Counsel also.  Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents. Admittedly, the complainant has availed housing loan for a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- from the 2^nd opposite party in the year 2006 as per Ex.A1, letter of sanction of loan dated:13.06.2006.  The said loan amount shall be repayable in 120 equal monthly instalments at the rate of Rs.33,038/- per month with interest at the rate of 11.25% per annum.  While so, the 2^nd opposite party required an office at Maduravoil to open its branch.   After negotiation, the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties agreed the complainant’s building and entered into a lease agreement with the complainant on 01.10.2009 as per Ex.A2 with effect from 01.11.2009 to 31.12.2012.   The demised lease property also situated in No.44, the 1^st Floor,  West Mada Street, Maduravoyal, Chennai – 600 095.  The plinth area is 1,250 sq. ft.  The 1^st opposite party paid an advance of Rs.1,50,000/-.  Ex.B2 is the copy of cheque for Rs.1,50,000/-.    As per the clause 4 of the lease agreement, the said advance shall be adjusted towards the rent for the last 10 months    Thereby, the opposite parties shall pay rent regularly.  But on 19.02.2011, the 2^nd opposite party sent a notice to the complainant stating that they have prepared to revoke the lease agreement and they wanted to vacate the premises on 28.02.2011 and requested the complainant  to pay the advance amount of Rs.1,50,000/-.   Ex.B3 is the notice dated:19.02.2011 by the 1^st opposite party.   The claim of the 1^st opposite party is totally against the terms and conditions of the Lease Deed dated:29.10.2009 Clause No.22 which reads as follows:

“22. The lessee shall have option to renew the lease at the expiry of the period of lease on such terms the Lessor and lessee may agree with an option to vacate the building at any time during the pendency of the agreement by giving 3 months notice”

 proves that the notice dated:19.02.2011 against the terms and conditions of the agreement.  

6.     Further the contention of the complainant is that from 19.02.2011, the 2^nd opposite party has not paid any rent and maintenance charges till the end of the lease period and even after more than a year the opposite parties has not vacated the leased premises and not even handed over the key of the building.   But suddenly, without any information, the 2^nd opposite party debited a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from the account of the complainant vide cheque No.008774 issued towards security for the home loan fraudulently affixing the date 19.04.2012 which is also reflected in Ex.A6, statement of accounts.   On a careful perusal of the statement of Accounts, it is very clear that the complainant used the cheque bearing Nos.30403 on 07.04.2012, 565052 on 11.04.2012, 231042 on 21.04.2012p, 30404 on 26.04.2012, 30405 on 28.04.2012, 565053 on 11.05.2012, 201043 on 22.05.2012 and 30406 on 31.05.2012 proves that the cheque utilised by the opposite parties is not in current use of the complainant which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.  Further the contention of the complainant is that even after issue of legal notice dated:07.05.2012 as per Ex.A7, the opposite parties has  not come forward to settle the issue amicably.  Hence, the complainant was constrained to file this case.  Further the contention of the complainant is that due RCOP of 36/2012 filed for eviction on the ground of wilful default committed by the 2^nd opposite party claiming arrears of rent of Rs.4,50,000/-. But no document filed before this Forum.  The said case was decreed and there was no appeal also.  But there is no iota of evidence in this Forum.   

7.     The learned Counsel for the opposite parties would contend that admittedly, the complainant availed loan of Rs.25,00,000/- on 24.07.2006.  It should be repayable in 120 equal instalments with the interest at the rate of 11.25%.  The allegation that the opposite parties had demanded blank cheques from the complainant and the complainant issued blank cheques towards security are absolutely false.  On a careful perusal of Ex.A1, it is seen that the rate of interest is 10%.  The complainant also has not stated the details of the blank cheques.  But the statement of account vide Ex.A6 shows the cheque used in the year 2012 and the impugned cheque used for collecting Rs.1,50,000/- from the account of the complainant by the opposite party grossly differs in serial number and issues.  The opposite parties has not pleaded and proved that the complainant issued old cheques towards refund of the advance amount related to the Tenancy Agreement.  Further the contention of the opposite parties is that admittedly, the opposite parties entered into a rental agreement with the complainant commencing from 01.11.2009 to 31.01.2012.   A sum of Rs.1,50,000/- paid towards advance as per Ex.B2.  The monthly rent is Rs.15,000/- as per Ex.B2.  Ex.B1 is the rental agreement.   Further the contention of the opposite parties is that they have decided to close the Maduravoil Branch and the staffs were transferred to another branches and sent notice of termination of rental agreement on 19.02.2011 as per Ex.B3.  For which, the complainant sent reply dated:21.02.2011 as per Ex.A4 to continue the premises till the end of the lease period.  The complainant has no right to compel the opposite parties to continue the tenancy.  As per clause 22 of Tenancy Agreement, three months notice shall be given. But as per Ex.B3, notice dated:19.02.2011 terminating the tenancy by 28.02.2011 which is totally against the terms and conditions.  Three months time has not been given by the opposite parties towards termination of tenancy amounts to deficiency in service.   The opposite parties shall pay rent upto end of April 2011 also.  There is no record to prove that the opposite parties paid rent upto the end of April 2011.  The letter terminating the tenancy and non-payment of rent as per the tenancy agreement amounts to deficiency in service.   

8.     Further the contention of the opposite parties is that they have vacated the building at the end of February 2011.  But the exact date of vacating the premises and the manner of vacating the premises and handing over key of the premises has not mentioned anywhere in this case.   There is no record to prove the same also establishes that the opposite party has not come with clean hands.  Further the contention of the opposite parties is that there is no relationship with the complainant and opposite parties as Consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The transaction between the complainant and the opposite parties is purely commercial.   But it is very clear from the records that against the rental agreement Clause 22, the opposite parties has issued Ex.B3, notice and has not paid the stipulated time and rent amount.   There is no record produced to show that the opposite parties vacated the premises amounts to deficiency in service squarely comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act.   Further the contention of the opposite parties is that the compensation claimed is imaginary and exorbitant.  The allegation that the opposite parties vacated the premises after efflux of time is totally false.   Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that the notice dated:19.02.2011 the date of termination of tenancy will be taken into consideration and vacating the premises as per clause 22 of the rental agreement.  Thereby, the opposite parties shall pay a sum of Rs.45,000/- towards arrears of rent and compensation of Rs.30,000/- cost Rs.5,000/-.

  In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.45,000/- (Rupees Forty five thousand only) being arrears of rent  and to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.

The aboveamounts shall be payablewithin six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 10^th day of April 2019. 

 

 

144616126.  

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.A1	13.06.2006	Copy of loan sanctioning letter
Ex.A2	.10.2009	Copy of lease deed
Ex.A3	19.02.2011	Copy of notice by the 1st opposite party
Ex.A4	21.02.2012	Copy of reply by the complainant
Ex.A5	29.01.2012	Copy of notice by the complainant
Ex.A6		Copy of Statement of Accounts
Ex.A7	07.05.2012	Copy of legal notice
Ex.A8		Copy of acknowledgement card by the 1st opposite party
Ex.A9	25.05.2012	Copy of reply by the 2nd opposite party

 

OPPOSITE PARTIES 1 & 2 SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.B1	29.10.2009	Copy of lease agreement between the parties
Ex.B2	03.11.2009	Copy of cheque No.531593 drawn on Bank of Baroda for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-
Ex.B3	19.02.2011	Copy of lease agreement termination notice to the complainant
Ex.B4	20.04.2012	Copy of receipt for the deposit amount by the opposite parties
Ex.B5	07.05.2012	Copy of legal notice issued by the complainant to the opposite parties
Ex.B6	25.05.2012	Copy of reply notice to the complainant

 

 

 

MEMBER                                                                  PRESIDENT