Date of Filing:04/03/2014
Date of Order:25/07/2016
BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE - 27.
Dated: 25th DAY OF JULY 2016
PRESENT
SRI.SYED ANSER KHALEEM, B.SC., B.Ed.,LL.B.,PRESIDENT
SRI.H.JANARDHAN,B.A.L, LL.B., MEMBER
SMT.BHARATI.B.VIBHUTE, B.E(I.P.) LL.B., MEMBER
COMPLAINT NO.432/2014
Smt. Manjulamma,
W/o of Muthappa,
Aged about 52 years,
Residing at No.27,
9th Cross, Cholurpalya,
Magadi Road,
Bangalore-560 023. …. Complainant
V/s
- The Manager/Managing Director,
The South Indian Bank Ltd.,
Head Office-SIB House,
Post Box No.28, Mission Quarters,
Thrissur-680 001. Kerala.
- The Branch Manager,
The South Indian Bank Ltd.,
Jayanagar Branch,
-
Bangalore-560 011. …. Opposite Parties
ORDER
BY SRI.SYED ANSER KHALEEM, PRESIDENT
1. This is the complaint filed Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred in short as O.Ps) alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and prays for direction to the O.Ps to handover/return the gold ornaments weighing 453.5 grams pledged by the complainant under Gold Loan Account No.047213, 48892 and 48893 by receiving the outstanding dues from the complainant and further O.Ps are directed to pay Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation to the complainant for having auctioned the gold ornaments of the complainant without giving prior notice to the complainant and further costs of the proceedings.
2. The brief facts of the complaint is that, the complainant by pledging the gold ornaments with the O.P bank obtained the gold loan of Rs.1,48,000/-. The complainant pledged the various gold ornaments on different dates and obtained gold loan of Rs.1,48,000/-, Rs.2,40,000/- and Rs.260,000/- in respect of Gold Loan Account No. 047213, 048892 and 048893 dated, 23.05.2012 and 31.08.2012 respectively. The period of gold loan is for one year only. It is stated that, due to their financial crises the complainant was unable to pay interest for the period of three months when the complainant approached the O.P bank, but the O.P.No.2 did not disclose the outstanding balance in order to clear the loan. Whereas O.P No.2 just prolonged the days and hence the complainant approached the head office. Ultimately the complainant got issued legal notice on 09.10.2013 to the O.Ps bank and expressed to clear the loan and demanded to return of the gold ornaments. But O.Ps did not reply the legal notice. The bank has misused the power and trying to knock-off the gold ornaments of the complainant. Hence the complainant also filed the complaint before the banking ombudsmen and the application is rejected and given advice to approach competent Forum. The complainant alleges deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and filed this complaint.
3. Upon issuance of notice, O.P No.1 and 2 appeared through their counsel and filed their version. In the version O.Ps contended that, the complaint is wholly misconceived, untenable and liable to be dismissed. Further contended the complaint is not maintainable before this Hon’ble Forum. The complaint is false and frivolous as there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. Further O.Ps also contended that there is no cause of action for filing the present complaint.
4. The O.Ps further contended that, the Gold ornaments which were pledged with the O.Ps are already sold in auction. Hence the present complaint is not maintainable before this Forum. The complainant is an intentional and willful defaulter and he had no intention to repay gold loan availed by her. Inspite of the same the complainant is now blaming the O.Ps bank. Further O.Ps has sent several notice, reminder to the complainant demanding for payment of gold loan. Inspite of which complainant never approached the O.Ps nor repaid the loan amount. The complainant before approaching this Forum has harassed the O.Ps by approaching the police authority, banking Ombudsmen and after failing now before the said Hon’ble Forum. The complainant has not come before this Hon’ble Forum with clean hands and has suppressed the material facts and further contended that the complaint is blowing hot and cold. The complainant has misused the powers and is trying to knock off the gold ornaments by the O.ps are all false. O.Ps further contended that the complainant after taking the loan amount did not bother to repay the same after the expiry of the 12 months from the date of O.P bank, even issued notice to the complainant then also the complainant did not approached the O.P bank. Instead of approaching the O.Ps bank at the right time and by making payment and collecting the gold ornaments pledged with the O.Ps bank she has filed the present complaint against the O.Ps are banking company dealing public money. As per the agreed terms of contract the O.Ps have sold the gold ornaments which were pledged by the complainant after following all the procedure laid down under the law. The complainant has no intention to make payment and has come up with false and frivolous complaint just to harass the O.Ps. Hence on the following grounds the O.Ps prays for dismissal the above complaint.
4. To substantiate the above case, both the parties have filed their affidavit evidence along with documents. We have heard the arguments.
5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the following points will arise for our considerations are:-
(A) Whether the complainant has proved
deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?
(B) Whether the complainant is entitled to the
relief prayed for in the complaint?
(C) What order?
6. Our answers to the above points are:-
POINT (A) & (B) : In the negative.
POINT (C): As per the final order
for the following:
REASONS
POINT (A):-
7. At the outset, it is not in dispute that the complainant availed three different loans by pledging gold ornaments as stated in the complainant. The sole attack of the complainant is that, though she is ready to redeem the gold loan but the O.Ps did not given outstanding balance and thereby she approached the head office and banking Ombudsmen where she could not found the relief and accordingly approached to this Forum. It is true that, the complainant issued legal notice but the O.Ps bank also replied the said notice.
8. Per-contra, O.P.s contended that, after the pledging of the gold ornaments the complainant did not turn to redeem the loan account and hence after expiry of the terms of loan they issued the legal notice to the address given by the complainant but said notices returned with a postal shara ‘Addressee is not found in the said address’ (no such person). Hence they have taken the paper publication in order to pledge the gold ornaments. On perusal of the copy of the copy of the paper publication it is evident that, in spite of paper publication the complainant did not turn to redeem the loan, hence they have auctioned the pledged gold ornaments for Rs.1,85,000/- and thereafter the sale proceeds were adjusted to the loan account and the remaining balance amount is credited to the Saving Bank account of the complainant.
9. On perusal of the legal notice dated 23.05.2012 and as well as notice dated 08.05.2013 with the copies of the acknowledgment with postal receipts, however, these notices returned un-served with a postal shara ‘No such person’. However, it is not worthy to mention that, one of the notice was received by one Lakshmi on behalf of the complainant but the complainant did not say anything about the receiving of the notice in her evidence. Hence the contention of the O.Ps. serving of the notice prior to auction of the gold cannot be doubted. Further on perusing the paper publication it also clearly reveals that the O.Ps have followed the due procedure prior to auction of the pledged gold. Whereas, on perusal of the notice issued by the complainant dated 9.10.2013 the said notice was sent after auctioning the pledged gold in question. The law will not lend its helping hand whoever slept over their rights. Hence, the complainant failed to prove deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and thereby the complainant is not entitled for any reliefs as sought in the complaint. Under the circumstances, we answered Point No.(A) and (B) in the negative.
POINT (C):
10. On the basis of the findings given above on the point No.(A) and (B) and in the result, we proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER
- The complaint is dismissed. No order as to cost.
- Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this the 25th Day of July 2016)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
*Rak
