DATE OF FILING 30.8.2010
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI
Dated this the 30th day of November, 2010
Present:
SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT
SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER
SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER
C.C No.184/2010
Between
Complainant : E.A. Chacko,
Inchanattu House,
Mammattikanam P.O.,.
Idukki District.
(By Adv: C.K. Babu)
And
Opposite Parties : The Branch Manager,
Union Bank of India,
Rajakkadu Branch,
Rajakkadu P.O.,
Idukki District.
O R D E R
SMT. BINDHU SOMAN (MEMBER)
The complainant had availed a loan of Rs.25,000/- from the opposite party. It was taken on 22.8.1988. Due to financial crisis, he could not remit the amount properly and hence the account became NPA. During 2000, when he enquired about the outstanding balance, the opposite party replied that the loan was written off. As a security of loan the complainant pledged his wife's 1 acre of land to the opposite party. The complainant asked his document and at the time the opposite party said that the title deed could be released only after complying with certain official formalities. In the end of 2009, the complainant again approached the opposite party for his title deed, then they replied that there is some outstanding amount. So the complainant requested for a statement of account, but they did not give, after filing a petition under Right to Information Act, they issued a letter dated 26.12.2009 and a statement of account. The account shows a balance of Rs.76,257/- in his account. The complainant stated that as on 31.3.1988, his balance is only Rs.5,563/-. Again on 27.1.2010, the opposite party had given a letter stated that his balance is Rs.11,322/-. Then the complainant approached the Ombudsman, they have issued a reply on 30.3.2010. After that the complainant issued a lawyer's notice, but it was not responded. Complainant stated that, if at all any amount is due to opposite party, it is a time barred debt. Under the above circumstance complainant approached the Forum for return of his document and to write off his debt.
2. In spite of notice from the Forum, the opposite party was absent. No written version filed. So the opposite party called exparte.
3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?
4. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P5 marked on the side of the complainant.
5. The POINT :- The complainant present and filed chief affidavit and the complainant was examined as PW1 and marked Exts.P1 to P5. Ext.P1 is the Account Ledger Copy. Ext.P2 is a letter from the opposite party dated 26.12.2009. Ext.P3 is also a letter from the opposite party dated 27.1.2010. Ext.P4 is the letter from Banking Ombudsman. Ext.P5 is the copy of lawyer's notice.
The opposite party is a leading bank, having number of branches in all throughout Kerala. The complainant had availed loan in the year 1988. The opposite party could not intimate this complainant about his balance in the account. The opposite party had taken a very long period to intimate the complainant about his balance in the account. The demand of statement of accounts is also not responded by the opposite party. As per the statement of account itself reveals that the loan is availed on 1988. The learned counsel of the complainant is also submitted that it is a time barred transaction. The opposite party replied that the loan has been included in the Write off scheme of the Government, when enquired about the same. So it may be true that, because of the same, the opposite party never proceeded against the complainant for the loan amount and it is not proper to proceed against the complainant after a long delay. There is no explanations from the part of the opposite party for the same. So we find deficiency in service in this aspect.
Hence the petition allowed and the opposite party is directed to recommend the complainant's loan in the write off scheme of the Government and also directed to return the title deed of the complainant within one month of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 30th day of November, 2010
Sd/-
SMT. BINDHU SOMAN (MEMBER)
Sd/-
I agree SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)
Sd/-
I agree SMT. SHEELA JACOB (MEMBER)
APPENDIX
Depositions :
On the side of the Complainant :
PW1 - E.A. Chacko
On the side of the Opposite Parties :
Nil.
Exhibits :
On the side of the Complainant :
Ext.P1 - Copy of the Account Ledger.
Ext.P2 - Copy of the letter from the opposite party dated 26.12.2009.
Ext.P3 - Copy of the letter from the opposite party dated 12.1.2010.
Ext.P4 - The letter from Banking Ombudsman dated 30.3.2010.
Ext.P5 - Copy of lawyer's notice dated 19.4.2010.
On the side of the Opposite Party :
Nil.
