BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 30th day of September, 2009

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER

SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER

C.C No.14/2009

Between

Complainant : C.N.Jayan

Cheruparambil House,

Anakkulam P.O,

Perumbakuthu,

Idukki District.

(By Adv: K.M.Sanu)

And

Opposite Parties : 1. The Secretary,

Devikulam Taluk Co-operative

Agricultural & Rural Development

Bank Limited No.I-136,

Adimali P.O, Adimali.

2. The President,

Devikulam Taluk Co-operative

Agricultural & Rural Development

Bank Limited No.I-136,

Adimali P.O, Adimali.

(Both by Adv: Praveen.K.George)

O R D E R

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)

Complainant's father, Late Mr.Narayanan availed a loan of Rs.11,000/- for the purpose of rubber cultivation, Rs.12,300/- for cultivating coffee and pepper wines in the year 1987 from the opposite party bank. 1.94 acres of land in the name of complainant's father was given as security for the said loan. Late Mr.Narayanan was unable to repay the loan because of the destruction in agriculture. After the death of the father in 1991, no intimation was received from the bank about the repayment of the loan. Complainant is residing and possessing the property owned by complainant's father. On 5.01.2009 a notice was received from the opposite party bank addressed in the name of Narayanan stating that the property possessed by the complainant is already auctioned by the bank, and it is registered in the name of the bank itself from SRO, Devikulam, so the bank decided to take possession of the property. It is also requested to appear before the bank. The complainant when approached the bank, they demanded Rs.1,07,648/- for the release of documents. After father's death, no notice received from the bank about the loan and its repayment. It is the duty of the bank to give notice to the legal heirs of late Narayanan to proceed against his property. The bank never included this loan in any of the debt waiver scheme declared by the Government. So this petition is filed for directing the bank to include the loan of the complainant's father in debt waiver scheme and also for set asiding the auction conducted by the bank.

2. The opposite party filed written version. As per the written version, the father of the complainant availed two loans from the opposite party bank and an amount of Rs.1,25,859/- is due as on February 2009. Because the loan was not closed, demand notices were sent to his father. Complainant is also aware of the proceedings. The opposite party is having receipts for the intimation given. The impugned loan account of deceased Narayanan was not eligible for consideration as per the specific directions issued by Government under the debt relief scheme. Proper notices were issued to the legal heirs of the late Narayanan. Steps under order 21, Rule 95, 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the delivery of property are already initiated prior to the institution of the complaint and so no deficiency in the part of opposite party.

3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?
 

4. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 and P2 on the side of the complainant. No oral evidence adduced from the part of the opposite parties and Exts.R1 to R4 marked on the side of the opposite parties.
 

5. The POINT :- The loan availed by the complainant's father was became due and the opposite party has conducted auction sale of the property given as security for the loan. Complainant's father expired in 1991 and no intimation was given to the legal heirs. Complainant was examined as PW1. The father of PW1 is entitled to get the benefit of write off scheme introduced by the Government for agriculturists. Father was expired in April 1991, PW1 approached the opposite party when a notice received from them. Ext.P2 is the notice issued by the opposite party,wherein it is directed to pay Rs.1,07,648/- for releasing the title deed. The auction proceedings were not intimated to the legal heirs of late Narayanan. Ext.P1 is the copy of the loan pass book of Late Narayanan. As per the opposite party, the sale was conducted by the Special Sale Officer on 14.06.2000 for Rs.58,000/-, copy of the proceedings is Ext.R1. The copy of the advertisement for sale is Ext.R2. Ext.R3 is the copy of the certificate issued to the purchaser of the property which is 1 acre and 45 cents in Mankulam Village owned by late Narayanan. The property in the name of Late Narayanan was already purchased by the bank itself, in the public auction conducted by the bank for Rs.58,000/-. The bank is now ready to release the property after a payment of Rs.1,07,648/- because the auction was conducted in the year 2000. As per the complainant, it is the duty of the opposite party to intimate the legal heirs of the deceased about the auction proceedings. No death certificate produced to show that the said Narayanan expired in the year 1991. The date of death of his father is also not delivered by the complainant anywhere. The procedure of the auction of the Special Sale Officer might have advertised in the news papers at that time. That is not denied by the complainant anywhere. The loan was availed in 1987 and the auction was conducted in the year 2000. So the application for including in the write off scheme of the Government ought have done earlier. This is not the ripe time for directing to give the benefit under the debt relief scheme. The opposite party is ready to return the property if the complainant pays the loan amount and interest. So we think that there is no deficiency in the part of opposite parties.

Hence the petition dismissed, with a direction to the opposite party to consider a lenient view in calculating the interest, if the complainant is ready to pay the loan amount to the bank.
 

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 30th day of September, 2009

Sd/-

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)

Sd/-

I agree SMT.SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER)

Sd/-

I agree SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of Complainant :

PW1 - C.N.Jayan

On the side of Opposite Parties :

Nil

Exhibits:

On the side of Complainant:

Ext.P1 - True copy of Loan Pass Book

Ext.P2 - Notice dated 5.01.2009 issued by the 2^nd opposite party

              to the complainant

On the side of Opposite Parties :

Ext.R1 - Photocopy of Sale Proceedings dated 14.06.2000

Ext.R2 - Photocopy of Sale Advertisement

Ext.R3 - Photocopy of the Certificate issued to the purchaser of the property

Ext.R4 - Photocopy of Complainant's letter dated 26.11.2007 addressed to

           the Ist opposite party