SRI.R. VIJAYAKUMAR, MEMBER.
The case of the complainants is that the opp.parties have collected excess amount as the loan amount and interest. This complaint is filed for return of the excess amount and share amounts along with interest and for other reliefs.
The case of the opp.parties is that the complainants have to pay the amount as agreed by them at the time of taking loans. No excess amount was collected from the complainant. The complainants were not eligible for getting the benefits of Agricultural loan or one time settlement.
The 1st complainant was examined as PW.1. Exts. P1 to P21 marked.DW.1 was examined on the side of opp.parties. Exts. D1 to D11 marked
Heard both sides
The points that would arise for consideration are:
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service?
2. Reliefs and costs.
POINTS 1 AND 2
The case of the complainant is that the complainant availed loan bearing No.MRS25/84 for an amount of Rs.4000/- and remitted back an excess amount of Rs.2323/-. The subsidy of Rs.1000/- allowable to the complainant also was not calculated. Hence an amount of Rs.3323/- is to be returned from the opp.parties.
As per loan No.SRTO 05/95-96 the 1st complainant had taken a loan for Rs.2,75,000/- and remitted back an excess amount of Rs.491/-
Share amount of Rs.2600/- and interest Rs.4940/- in loan NO.T5/84-85, share amount of Rs.200/- and interest Rs.380/- in loan No.MRS25/84-85. Share amount Rs.12,500/- and interest Rs.13,750/- in SRTO 05/95-96 and share amount of Rs. 12,781/- and interest Rs.23,005/- are to be returned to the 1st complainant. In total an amount of Rs.70,156/- and interest is to be returned to the 1st complainant.
The 2nd complainant is entitled to return the excess amount of Rs.5,922/- which was collected by the opp.parties as per Loan No.LF6085/84-85 along with interest at the rate of 6%. Share amount Rs.250/- and 10% interest Rs.800/- in Loan No.108/72-73, share amount Rs.500/- and interest Rs.1350/- in Loan NO.578/78, share amount Rs.500/- and 10% interest Rs.950/- in Loan No.534/84-85, additional share amount Rs.200/- dated 24..5..84 and 10% interest Rs.380/- with 6% interest are to be returned by opp.party Bank. The complainant is entitled to get total amount of Rs.4930/- along with 6% interest from the opp.parties.
The complainants are entitled to include their loan in the OTS Scheme ended on 31..3..2005. No reply was given by the opp.parties for the requests made by the complainants for getting the benefits of waiving interest which was allowed by the Co-Operative Banks in the state. The opp.parties have not considered the application of the complainant dated 15..11.2000 for getting statement of accounts. Hence the complainant filed OP.No.981 of 2001 [T] which is adjudged in favour of the complainant. But the opp.parties without complying with the order of the Hon’ble High court, issued a statement of accounts including false informations. The opp.party, without giving any chance to verify the bonafides of the statement of accounts had taken Auction Proceedings. The Auction proceedings were stopped afterwards.
The opp.parties are bound to settle the accounts of the complainants as per the instructions in the OTS Scheme and the complainants are entitled to get the excess amount and share amount along with interest at the rate of 6%. The opp.parties caused mental agony to the complainants by imposing excess interest, penal interest and by taking steps for recovery of amount and sale of pledged property.,
The case of opp.parties is that the memo of accounts and statement of repayments produced by the complainants are utter false and against the agreement executed by the complainants and the opp.parties. The statement that the loan amount were closed is false. The claim regarding the share amount and interest is also baseless. No bonafides for the claim of Rs.5,992/- and of Rs.4,930/- along with interest. The statement that the complainants were eligible for getting benefits avoiding the interest also is
incorrect. The complainant is also not eligible for getting benefits under One Time Settlement and as per circulars issued by NABARD . The complainants have to pay the amount agreed by them at the time of availing loans. There is no deficiency in service from the part of opp.parties.
According to the complainants and as per the memo of accounts filed by the 1st complainant, they are entitled to get Rs.84,822/- with interest at the rate of 6% from the opp.party Bank. In addition to this amount they are also entitled to get Rs.8000/- which was paid by the 2nd complainant to the 3rd opp.party when he visited the house of complainants for sale of their properties on 26..3..2005.
According to the opp.parties the complainants defaulted in repayment of loans availed by the complainants and as on 8..11..2010 Rs. 4,26,124/- is due to the Bank. The complainants filed this complaint only with an intention to escape from the liability and to protract and delay the execution steps started by the 3rd opp.party. The statement of accounts prepared by the complainants isimaginary.
The pertinent aspect to be discussed in this case is whether the complainants are entitled to get the benefits given to the loanees as per circulars issued by Co-Operative Registrar and NABARD.
According to the complainants they were entitled to get the benefits are as per circular issued by NABARD and Registrar of Co-Operative Societies
The Opp.party’s contention is that the complainants were not entitled to get the benefits as per the circulars issued by the Co-operative Registrar and NABARD. They were not eligible to get the benefits as per the notifications of 1st opp.party Bank also. As per the notifications benefit was granted only for the Agricultural loans availed after 1..4..1997 which was in default on 31..12..1997. The loans availed by the complainant will not come under the purview of the prescribed period. The complainants never approached the bank to settle the loan accounts as per one time settlement. Even though the 1st opp.party Bank issued reply through registered post to the complainants for Ext.P8 as per the direction of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala , the complainant never turned up to verify the loan accounts..
The complainants had produced some pages of News papers in which the details of OTS Schemes was published and marked as P19 to P20 [G]. As per Ext. P 20 [f], time limit for OTS was extended up to 31..3..2005 . The interest rate of agricultural loan was 10% instead of 11%. As per those circulars the opp.party is entitled to realize interest at the rate of 10% and 11% only. The opp.party’s bank included those loans in OTS ended on 31..3..2005. The opp.parties signed the intimation letter on 26..3..2005, but it was reached at the complainants only on 4/5/2005. This letter was marked as Ext.P21.
We have carefully verified the documents adduced by the complainants.. Ext. P19 is the copy of Malayala Manorama daily dated 11.9.2010 in which the news regarding the OTS Benefits was published. It is stated that revised OTS benefits are announced by State Co-Operative Bank as per letter dated 20..8..2004 and Letter NO.CRM/LFS 2338/2004-05. The Scheme was suggested to the loans which were became overdue before 7years and interest rate of settlement is 12% avoiding Penal interest and other charges.. Exts P20 [a] is the circular NO.35/2003 issued by Registrar of Co-operative Societies in charge dated 10..7..2003. As per this circular benefits offered to the loans which were overdue as on 31..3..2001. The rate of interest for settlement was 12% per annum and payment can be made in or 10 installments. The 1st installment must be paid before 31..12..2003.
Ext. P20 [b] is the circular NO.39/2003 issued by the Co-operative Registrar in charge dated 17..7..2003 offering benefits as per Ext. P20 [a] and for the same period.
Ext.P20 [c] is the circular NO.15/2006 issued by Registrar of Co-operative Societies in charge dated 31..3..2004 extending the benefits of one time settlement upto July 31 2004. As per Ext.P20[c] benefits offered to the loanees is to close the accounts on receipt of Principal amount along with interest at the rate of 11% avoiding penal interests and other charges for the loans which were became over due as on 31..3..2004.. Chance for repayment of the amount in 10 equal installments also allowed under this scheme.
Ext P20 [d] is the information given by Asst. General Manager, Kerala Regional office of NABARD regarding the rate of interest charged by SLDB/PLDB from the farmers during 1995-96. The rate of interest chargeable for the loan availed by farmers is clearly described in Ext.P 20[d] .Rate of interest chargeable to the ultimate beneficiaries who have availed loan is as may be determined by SLDB. Rate of interest on refinance from 1.4.95 to 31..7..95 upto Rs. 25,000/-is 6.5%, over 25,000/- and upto 2 lakhs – 9.5%, over 2 lakhs 9.5% [ thrust area] and 10.5[ non thrust area.] Rate of interest on refinance from 1.8.95 to 31..3..96 upto Rs.25,000/- 6.5% over 25000/- and upto 2 lakhs 9.5% and over 2 Lakhs 12% in respect of term loans for 3 years and above for agriculture, Small Scale Industries and Small Road Transport Operators owing up to two vehicles.
Ext. Ext. P20 [e] is the receipt issued by Special Sale Officer of opp.party Bank for an amount of Rs.3000/-
Ext. P20 [f] is the copy of the circular NO.50/04 dated 31..12..2004 issued by Registrar of Co-operative Societies which was sent to the complainant on application under Right to Information Act. The circular is issued extending the period of One Time Settlement Scheme from 31st December 2004 till 31..3..2005 as per the same guidelines in the circular No.15/04.
Ext. P20 [G] is the copy of the 5th page of Malayala Manorama daily dated 8..8..2003. The news published in Ext.P20 [G] is regarding the scheme for writing off old dated NPA loans which were due in the year 1997. On the basis of the scheme promoted by NABARD and one time settlement of loans receiving reduced payment of interest at the rate of 12%.
Ext.P21 is the letter issued to the 2nd complainant dated 1..5..2005 by the Secretary of opp.party Bank intimating her that loan NOs.6055 for Rs.25,600/- and SR70-5/95-96 for Rs.2,44,200/- can be settled under One Time Settlement Scheme waiving penal interest Rs.75,771/- and charging interest only at the rate of 12% if the complaint remit the Loan amount along with interest before 31..3..2005.
The opp.parties also produced documents in relation with the OTS and other Settlement schemes promoted by the opp.party Bank itself as per the direction of the Co-Operative Department. Ext. D7 series is the paper publication dated 5..7..2008,, 14..2..2009 and 12..6..2009 as per ‘Navaratnam Keraleeyam’ and ‘Satha Sathamanam Keraleeyam Nashta Nivaranam’
Ext. D8 is the Circular dated 11.6..2008 issued by Secretary Finance services of the Kerala State Co-Operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd Clause 4.3 of the Circular clearly stated that nothing contained in this scheme shall apply to any loan disbursed by a lending institution prior to March 31, 1997. Ext. P10 also is the circular issued by the Managing Director Kerala State Co-Operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. In Clause II of this circular it is stated that the period of implementation of the Scheme is from 1..2..2009 to 31..3..2009. It is also stated that the loans which were not became over due but paid the installment amount and closed the due amount, will not come within the purview of the Scheme as per Ext.P10.
As per clause VII, the loanees who had not received the benefits as per Central Agricultural Debt Relief Scheme and who had taken Agricultural loan before 1..4..97 also can settle the loan on payment of loan amount along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from overdue date and avoiding penal interest and other expenses. There is also a provision to regularize the loan on payment of installment dues.
The learned counsel for the complainant argued that the complainants are entitled to include their loan in the OTS Scheme ended on 31..3..2005. But the complainants had not produced any document to show that they had approached the bank to close the loan as per the guidelines for one time settlement Scheme as per the conditions stated in the circular issued by the Co-operative Registrar
The complainants had not stated specific dates on which they had availed loans from the opp.party bank. As per Ext. D1 the complainant had submitted an affidavit before the opp.party Bank for the registration of Gehan and as per Ext. D2 Gehan was executed on 25..1..1996 for a maximum amount of Rs.3,14,300/-
The complainant had produced the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala on CMP No.15821/2001 in OPNo.9821/2001 dated 25th March 2002 and marked as Ext.P8. In the light of this order, the opp.party issued a Notice dated 15..11.2002 in which the details of the loans availed by the complainants and a detailed statement of accounts included. It is also stated in this notice that if any doubt arising out of the statement of accounts, the complainant can approach the Bank and verify directly his accounts within 7 days. The complainant had not utilized the chance of verification of his accounts. It is also stated in Ext. D3 that the complainants will get the benefits proposed by the Government if the complainants close the loan account before 15..11.2002. But even though sufficient opportunities has been given, the complainant had not approached the opp.party Bank to verify his accounts or had not made any attempt to close the loan accounts.
The 1st complainant sent an Advocate Notice dated 10..8..2003 after receiving a notice from opp.party on 7..4..2003 intimating the sale of property. The notice marked as Ext. D4. Ext. D5 is the reply notice issued by the 1st opp.party
On verification of Exts.P20 [a], P20[b], P20[c] P20[e] circulars we find that these circulars are issued by the authorities only after a long period of issuance of Ext. D3. We have also find that Ext.P20 [d] is not applicable as it relates to the directions of rate of interest charged by SLDB/PLDB from farmers during 95-96 and the complainant had availed the alleged loans from the opp.parties in the year 1997.From these facts it is clear that even though the complainant had produced circulars issued by the authorities time to time he had never approached the opp.party bank to settle and close his accounts. No evidence produced by the complainant to prove that he had expressed his willing to close the account. It is obvious that he was never willingness to close the accounts. We are also of the feeling that the intention of the complainant is only to delay the execution process started by the opp.parties.
The memo of accounts produced by the complainant was prepared and signed by himself . These documents has no authenticity. The complainant himself had admitted that it was not verified by an auditor. The opp.party challenged EXts.P1 to P4 specifically denying the false statements made by the complainant regarding the rate of interest and stating that the statements are not in terms of agreement entered between the complainants and Bank at the time of availing loan. The complainants miserably failed to prove the authenticity and genuinity of Ext.P1 to P4.
Considering all the facts, circumstances and entire evidence before us we find that there is no deficiency in service from the part of opp.parties. Points found accordingly.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed. There is no order as to costs.
Dated this the 22nd day of June, 2012.
I N D E X
List of witnesses for the complainant
PW.1.- Madhavan Pillai.C
List of documents for the complainant
P1. – Memo of Accounts
P2. – Memo of Accounts SRT 05/95-96
P3. – Memo of accounts
P4. – Memo of accounts [Loan No.6085]Copy of notice sent by the complainant
P6. – Acknowledgement card.
P7. – Copy of DD sent by Bank
P8. – Order copy of O.P.No..9821 dated 22..3..2002
P9. – Copy of Ext.P8
P10. – Reply sent by the Bank
P11. – Copy of reply sent by the complainantP12 – Receipts
P13. – Receipts
P14. – Receipts
P15. – Copy of DD
P16. – Receipt
P17. – Receipt
P18. – Receipt
P19. – Paper Publication
P20. – High Court order in WP [C]4039/04
P20 [a] Circular NO.35/2003
P20[b]. - Circular No.39/03
P20[c]. - Circular No.15/2004
P20[d]. – Information under Right to Information Act 2005Ext. 20 [E]. – Receipt
P20[F]. – Circular NO.50/04
P20[G]. – Paper Publication
P21. – Letter dated 1..5..2005 to the complainant
List of witnesses for the opp.parties
DW.1. – Rajendran Pillai
List of documents for the opp.party
D1. – Affidavit
D2. – Form No.1 [Gehan]
D3. – Notice dated 5..11.2002
D4. – Advocate notice
D5. - Acknowledgement card
D6. – Copy of Records in OP.9821/01
D7. – Paper Publication
D8. – Direction issued by Kerala State Co-Operative BVank
D9. – Gehan
D10. – Circular
D11. – Decision of Bank dated13..6..08
