D.O.F:05/01/2018
D.O.O:10/02/2022
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.No.03/2018
Dated this, the 10th day of February 2022
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M: MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
Kateel Garments
Door No. IV -1073, Manimunda Tower
Near Uppala Bus Stand, Manjeshwara Taluk
Uppala Village, Kasaragod District – 671322 : Complainant
Rep. by its Managing Partner, Mr. Rajesh.K
(Adv: Suresh.K.P)
And
- The Branch Manager
M/s Kerala Financial Corporation
High Land Plaza, M.G Road
Kasaragod -671121
- The Managing Director
M/s Kerala Financial Corporation: Opposite Parties
Vellayambalam, Thiruvanathapuram -33
(Adv: Manikandhan Nambiar.K.OP 1&2 )
- The Deputy Tahasildar for Revenue Recovery
Taluk Office for Manjeshwara Taluk
Uppala Post, Manjeshwara Taluk -671322
(Adv: Addl. Govt Pleader)
O R D E R
SRI.KRISHNAN.K :PRESIDENT
Complaint filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act:-
The case of the complainant in short is that his partnership firm availed financial assistance from Opposite Party to the tune of Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty lakhs only) to be repaid within ten years by yearly instalment with interest but interest shall be collected from Government. According to complainant they paid the amount due. But they received notice dated 04/12/2017demanding Rs. 19,62,562/- claiming additional charge. Demand by Opposite Party is against law. There is deficiency in service and therefore Opposite Parties are to be directed to drop all the proceedings made in the demand notice dated 04/12/2017, and to collect yearly amount as per terms of agreement to pay compensation and litigation costs.
2. The Opposite Party No:1and 2 filed joint version. It is stated that challenging RR proceedings by way of consumer complaint is not maintainable. Requisition is sent to Opposite Party No:3 for recovery as per RR. Act , loan carries interest, that complainant entered in to an agreement its terms are violated, party is not entitled to benefit of interest, penal interest is payable , that the unit is closed loan amount is misused, demand is made for amount legally due and have no deficiency in service.
3. The Opposite Party No:3 filed its version, notice of demand is as per requisition as per law, section 72 of RR Act is a bar and all questions to be decided by provisions of RR Act and claim is to be satisfied by complainant and the consumer complaint is to be dismissed.
4. The complainant filed chief affidavit marked documents Ext A1 to A4 Ext A1 and 2 are cash receipts. Ext A3 disability certificate and copy of demand notice is Ext A4. Opposite Party No:1 filed chief affidavit and marked loan sanction letter is Ext B1 agreement as Ext B2 and statement of accounts Ext B3.
5. As per the case of both parties following points arise for consideration.
a) Whether there is any deficiency in service in demanding loan amount or taking legal recourse and if whether complainant is entitled for any relief in the complaint? If so for what reliefs?
6. The complainant admits availing loan amount and repayable, of course Government agreed to pay interest for those honestly repaid as per the terms of agreement not for those defaulters. As on 16/09/2021 liability is Rs.33,09,950/- complainant created equitable mortgage by depositing title deeds, RR proceeding are initiated after complying legal requirements.
7. KFC is formed as a statutory corporation constituted and the Act and more than 95% of the shares are held and controlled by the State Government. Its recovery policy as approved by the board from time to time. The corporation is independent autonomous statutory body having own constitution and rules to abide by and functions and obligations to discharge.
8. Corporation deal with public money for benefit. The approach has to be public oriented , helpful to the loanee, without loss to the corporation.
9. At the same time corporation is not like an ordinary money lender as a bank which lends money. It is a lender with a purpose, the purpose being promoting the small and medium Industries. At the same time, it is necessary to recover loans so that it can be given fresh loan to others.
10. Under section 31 of the Act interest will be payable in accordance with the terms of the agreement.
The procedure followed by KFC to realize the dues cannot be held to be unreasonable or unfair. The borrower failed to repay the loan amount. The purpose of corporation is promoting the small and medium industries. The fairness required of the corporation cannot be carried to the extent of disabling it from recovering what is due to it.
11. The main issue is whether there is any deficiency in service by the corporation. Despite of the short comings and negative action by the complainant, the corporation in all fairness has given opportunities to pay the loan amount with interest. Instead of accepting the offer the complainant filed consumer complaint alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part the corporation. We are of firm opinion that seeking recovery of loan amount due through legal process is not a deficiency in service and instead challenging it under the very provision of Kerala Revenue Recovery Act recourse on the ground of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the corporation is unjustified and hence liable to be rejected and hence for reasons stated above the complainant deserves to be dismissed. Hence complaint is dismissed without any order as to costs.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1&A2- Cash receipt voucher
A3- Disability certificate
A4- Demand notice
B1- Loan sanction letter
B2- Loan agreement
B3- statement of account
Witness Examined
Pw1- Rajesh
Dw1- Noushad. T.T
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Senior Superintendent
Ps/
