THE KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, VAZHUTHACADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL    NO.  368/2018

ORDER DATED.01/09/2022

(Appeal filed against the order in CC.NO. 19/2018, CDRF,Wayanad)

PRESENT:

SRI. T.S.P. MOOSATH : JUDICIAL MEMBER

SRI.RANJIT . R    : MEMBER

SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER

APPELLANT:

          The Branch Manager,

          Indusind Bank, Consumer Finance Division,

          City Tower Building, Rahim Memorial Road,

          Gandhi Junction, Sulthan Bathery  Branch.

          (By Adv. S. Krishna kumar )

V/S

RESPONDENT:

          Mr. Shibin . T.J. S/o Jacob,

          Thadikulangara House, Kuppadi Post,

          Sulthan Bathery.

ORDER

SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER

          Appellant is the opposite party in CC.No. 19/2018 of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Wayanad and the respondent is the complainant.

          2. The dispute is  regarding the  calculation of loan amount.  The appellant is a Bank.   The complaint   is for the  refund of the excess amount  collected by the bank.  The District Forum partly allowed the complaint.

          3. The Forum directed  the opposite party  to refund Rs. 1,16,575/- along with 12% interest from 30-12-2017 and also directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- as costs to the  complainant.

          4. The opposite party was ex-parte before the  Forum.  This appeal is  against  the ex-parte order.

          5. The appellant submitted that the order of the Forum is not maintainable as against  facts  and law of the case.  The Forum had not

given sufficient  time to  the opposite party to file version and  contest the case.   The Forum has  taken hasty   steps to  pass   order in favour of the  complainant  without any merit.

          6. The case was posted  for  return of notice on 19/02/2018,   the notice served to the opposite party only on 17-02-2018.   Thereafter   the case was posted on 01-03-2018 for evidence of the complainant.  But without  serving  notice  to  the opposite party,  the case was called on 27-02-2018.  These are the  main contentions raised by the appellant  against the impugned order.

          7.  We verified the entire case  records and find  that the contentions raised by the appellant   are true and sustainable.  Hence in the  interest of justice  we find that it is reasonable to allow the appeal and  give  sufficient   time to the appellant  to file  version and  contest  the case  before the Forum .  In  these   circumstances we do not  gone through the merits of the case.

          8. However remission of the case, setting aside the order of the District Forum can be ordered  only on  terms directing the appellant  to compensate the injury likely to be caused by the   delay in culmination of the proceedings to the respondent.  Appellant  has to pay Rs. 5000/- as costs to the respondent/ complainant  as a condition precedent  for setting aside the order and remission of the case.    Complainant/respondent is permitted to get release of the amount of Rs. 5000/- ordered as costs from the amount deposited by the appellant  at the time of filing  the appeal, on proper application.   The appellant  is  permitted to obtain  release of the balance amount  deposited by him before the  State  Commission on  proper application.

          In the result, the appeal is allowed.  The order passed by the District Forum in C.C. No. 19/2018 is set aside and the matter is  remanded for fresh  disposal, after giving opportunity to the appellant  to file version  and to adduce evidence, if any.  The District Forum shall dispose of the complaint  as early as possible.

          Send back the records to the District Forum, forthwith.

 T.S.P. MOOSATH : JUDICIAL MEMBER

                  RANJIT . R    : MEMBER

               BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER

Sh/-