DATE OF FILING : 6.6.2011
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI
Dated this the 26th day of August, 2011
Present:
SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT
SMT.BINDHU SOMAN MEMBER
C.C No.125/2011
Between
Complainant : Haridas V.,
Muraleebhavanam,
Kompayar P.O.,
Kallar – 685 552
Idukki District.
And
Opposite Parties : 1. The Assistant Secretary,
Kerala State Housing Board,
Idukki Division, Kattappana,
Kattappana P.O.,
Idukki District - 685 508.
2. The Secretary,
Kerala State Housing Board, Thiruvananthapuram.
(Both by Adv: V.C. Sebastian)
3. The Chief Revenue Officer,
Kerala State Housing Board, Thiruvananthapuram.
O R D E R
SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHN (PRESIDENT)
The complainant availed a loan of Rs.1 lakh from the opposite party for the construction of his residence and the repayment of the loan was in monthly instalments of Rs.1,905/- each, in which the property of 15 cents of the complainant was given as security for the loan. The complainant was not able to repay the loan promptly. The statement of account of the loan was not received by the complainant from the opposite party even after repeated demands. The complainant paid about Rs.25,000/- to the opposite party and the opposite party is claiming Rs.3,01,374/- from the complainant. The amount demanded by the opposite party is not legal and the interest charged is hike and this petition is filed for getting instalment facility for the loan availed by the complainant and for avoiding penal and default interest of the loan, also for compensation.
2. The opposite party filed written version admitting that the complainant availed loan of Rs.1 lakh from the opposite party and as security for the loan, the property of the complainant which is 6 Ares 7 m2 of land in the Survey No.4/1 of (cont......2)
- 2 -
Parathodu Village was mortgaged to the opposite party. The loan was disbursed by the opposite party with an interest of 18.25% and it was to be repaid in monthly instalments of Rs.1,905/-. The interest of the loan has been reduced to 14.5% from 1.5.2003 onwards, but the complainant never paid the instalments promptly and repaid only Rs.17,590/- to the opposite party till now. So the complainant's loan account has been calculated as:
loan amount Rs.3,631.51
Interest Rs.13,525.29
Penal interest Rs.52.50
Default interest Rs.381.00
A total of Rs.17,590/- was paid by the complainant to the opposite party. So the recovery proceedings started against the complainant as on 31.1.2008 and as per the statements of account, dated 30.6.2011, the complainant has to pay Rs.4,22,113/- to the opposite party. As per the OTS facility provided by the Government and the opposite party, the opposite party deducted about Rs.2 lakhs and so the complainant has to pay Rs.2,47,113.58 to the opposite party and the payment of the same was upto 30.6.2011. But it is extended to 30th September, 2011. As per the loan agreement created by the complainant, the complainant is entitled to pay the amount and its interest and penal interest and so its recovery proceedings started by the opposite party are legal. So there is no deficiency from the part of the 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. No oral evidence adduced by both the parties. Heard from both sides. Exts. P1(series) and P2(series) marked on the side of the complainant and Exts.R1(series) and R2 marked on the side of the opposite parties.
5. The POINT :- As per the complainant, he availed a loan of Rs.1 lakh from the opposite party. But he already repaid Rs.25,000/- to the opposite party in various instalments. Ext.P1(series) receipts are issued by the opposite party for the payments. Due to financial crisis, the complainant was not able to repay the loan promptly. The letters issued by the opposite party to the complainant are marked as Ext.P2(series). The opposite parties are providing OTS facility extended to other loanees, but they deliberately avoided the complainant and the interest charged by the opposite party is hike and illegal. As per the statement of accounts which is marked as Ext.R2, the complainant paid only Rs.17,590/- to the opposite party's loan account. The loan has to be repaid in 108 instalments and each instalment with an amount of Rs.1,905/-.
(cont.......3)
- 3 -
The complainant defaulted the instalments and so he should pay the penal interest and default interest of the loan. As per the Ext.R1 loan agreement created between the complainant and opposite parties, the interest rate of the loan is 20.5%, but it is reduced as 14.5% by the opposite parties. The opposite parties are also providing OTS facility to the complainant. The complainant has to pay only Rs.2,47,113.58 /- as per the OTS facility and it is extended to September 30th, 2011. As per the opposite party, they already given a reduction of more than Rs.2 lakhs in the loan account of the complainant. So we think that as per Ext.R1 loan agreement which is signed by the complainant, it is written that 20% as interest rate, but the opposite party should produce evidence to show that 20% interest can be charged by opposite party, as per the norms of RBI. There is no evidence produced by the opposite party, no circular from the RBI or Government to show that the opposite party can avail an interest rate of 20% from the complainant. It is admitted by the complainant himself that the loan instalments are due and he paid only Rs.25,070/- to the opposite parties. Ext.R2 statement of account also reveals that the complainant paid only a nominal amount. The complainant, who is a coolie, due to financial crisis, he was not able to repay the amount promptly. The complainant can avail OTS facility from the opposite party. So we think that it is proper to charge 12% interest for the due instalments for the defaulted period and it is not proper to charge penal interest and default interest from the complainant. The opposite party already charged interest rate for the loan and it is divided into 108 monthly instalments and again charging penal interest is not at all proper. So the opposite party must settle the loan account of the complainant with an interest rate of 12% for the due instalments, for the period of due. It is not proper to charge such a hike interest from the complainant without any circular or directions from the RBI or Government.
Hence the petition partially allowed. The opposite parties are directed to allow OTS facility to the complainant and avoid penal interest and default interest as per the norms and guidelines of RBI and Government, or settle the loan account of the complainant with 12% interest per annum for the defaulted instalments for the defaulted period.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 26th day of August, 2011
Sd/-
SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHN (PRESIDENT)
Sd/-
SMT. BINDHU SOMAN( MEMBER)
(cont......4)
- 4 -
APPENDIX
Depositions :
Ni.
Exhibits :
On the side of the Complainant :
Ext.P1(series) - The receipts issued by the opposite party – 6 Nos.
Ext.P2(series) - The letters issued by the opposite party dated 29.6.1999
and 15.9.1999.
On the side of the Opposite Parties :
Ext.R1(series) - Copy of the mortgage deed dated 10.5.1999.
Ext.R2 - The statement of account of the loan of the complainant.
