BHASKARAN.C filed a consumer case on 02 Jun 2008 against SECRETARY in the Kozhikode Consumer Court. The case no is 321/2005 and the judgment uploaded on 30 Nov -0001.
Kerala
Kozhikode
321/2005
BHASKARAN.C - Complainant(s)
Versus
SECRETARY - Opp.Party(s)
02 Jun 2008
ORDER
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (Notice Under Section-13 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986)(No.68 of 1986) KOZHIKODE consumer case(CC) No. 321/2005
BHASKARAN.C
...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
SECRETARY PRESIDENT
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
ORDER By G. Yadunadhan, President: The case of the complainant is that the complainant obtained Rs.1,00,000/- as a loan from the opposite party @ interest 13.75% and the opposite party kept in account Rs.5,500/- as a share capital. The complainant alleges that all other financial institutions reduced rate of interest. Hence he decided to settle the loan and he obtained hand loan from some individuals and paid Rs.50,000/- to the opposite party and the remaining balance he paid on 17-1-05. At the time of closing of the loan opposite party failed to return the original documents kept with them for the same complainant made many enquiries directly and through telephone. On 18-6-05 the complainant caused to send a letter under certificate of posting and on 8-8-05 sent a registered letter with acknowledgement, no reply was received from the opposite party and documents were not returned to him. Due to this complainant could not obtain loan from other financial institution and could not pay the hand loan from some individuals, complainant sustained a loss of Rs.15000/-. Hence complainant prays for Rs.15000/- and return of the original documents pledged at the time of obtaining loan. Opposite party filed a version stating that the complainant obtained loan from them but interest rate quoted is wrong at the time of sanctioning of the loan the rate of interest is 15.5%. Subsequently it was reduced to 13.75%. Opposite party is working under Kerala State Co.Operative Housing Federation. As per their rules for every one lakh loan of Rs.5500/- is to be kept as share capital, that can be released only when the loan is closed, as such opposite party returned the amount. Opposite party admits that within the period complainant paid the entire dues, Opposite party denies that after completion of the loan dues he requested several times for the return of original documents. It is the case of the opposite party that original documents will be kept with Kerala State Co.Operative Housing Federation and when the loan is closed, Opposite party will obtain those documents from the said Federation. Complainant after closing the loan claimed 3% interest subsidy since he is a Government employee. On 1995 onwards the same is closed. Opposite party admits that on 18-6-05 received a letter under the certificate of posting requesting to return the original title deeds. Opposite party contacted the said Federation and informed the complainant about the return of documents. Since he has not turned up, on 27-7-05 sent a letter under certificate of posting instead of receiving the documents. On 8-8-05 complainant unnecessarily sent a registered notice opposite party was ready and willing to deliver the original documents which was pledged. This was informed to the complainant directly and through letter. There was no deficiency on the part of the opposite party and all the original documents with them were ready to be returned the same and the complainant is not entitled to get any relief. The point arose for consideration whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party as alleged? (2) What is the relief and cost? Complainant is examined as PW1. Ext.A1 to A3 series were marked on complainants side. RW1 was examined and Ext.B1 and B2 were marked on opposite partys side. No oral evidence on the side of the opposite party. It is the admitted case of the opposite party that the complainant obtained the loan and repaid the amount due. After closing the loan what prevented the opposite party returning the original documents to the complainant. The only explanation offered by the opposite parties is that the original documents were kept with Kerala State Co.operative Housing Federation and after completion of the loan they obtained the original documents from the said federation but no explanation regarding the request made by the complainant for return of the documents. It is very interesting to note that opposite party sent a letter that is Ext.B1 on 27-7-05 what is the explanation for this long lasting delay, there is no satisfactory explanation offered by the opposite party. It is the duty of the opposite party to return the original documents then and there when it is received from the federation. Complainant is justified when he sent a letter to the opposite party for return of documents , the opposite party could have very well returned the documents to the complainant without delay. When they receives such a letter. Instead of doing so the opposite party sent a letter on 27-7-05. Again on 8-8-05 complainant was constrained to send a registered letter for the very same purpose. No explanation is rendered by the opposite party in responding to this letter also,at the same time opposite parties admits that they were ready to return the documents. If they were sincere in their effort nothing prevents from the opposite party producing the same before this Forum. The matter could have adjudicated very easily if they do so. Till this day they were reluctant to do so. Hence this Forum finds a gross negligence and deficiency of service on the part of opposite party. Hence we are of the opinion that the petition is allowed and opposite parties are directed to return all original documents produced at the time of taking loan and also directed to pay a compensation of Rs.3000/- to the complainant within one month. Pronounced in the open court this the 2nd day of June 2008. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER APPENDIX Documents exhibited for the complainant A1. Photocopy of acknowledgement. A2. Photocopy of receipt. A3. Photocopy of letter dt. 3-8-05. Documents exhibited for the opposite party. B1. Copy of letter dt. 27-7-05 B2. Post office receipt under certificate of posting. Witness examined for the complainant. PW1. C. Bhaskaran (Complainant) Witness examined for the opposite party. RW1. Ajithkumar, Ushas, P.O. Thalakulathur. Sd/- PRESIDENT // True Copy// (Forwarded/By order) SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT.
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.