D.O.F:26/11/2022
D.O.O:15/03/2023
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KASARAGOD
CC.No.288/2022
Dated this, the 15th day of March 2023
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K :PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M: MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
MariyammaSajid, aged 34 years
W/o Sajid Muhammed
R/at Poomas house, Nizamuddin Nagar
Bendichal, Chattanchal, Thekkil Post & Village : Complainant
Kasaragod Taluk and District – 671541
(Adv: Suresh.K.P)
And
The Branch Manager
M/s Cholamandalm Investment Finance Ltd. : Opposite Party
Near Deepa Gold
Kanhangad Post, Kasaragod Dist – 671321
ORDER
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M: MEMBER
The complaint is filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 on the ground of service deficiency on the part of Opposite party.
The facts of the case in brief as follows: The complainant obtained a loan of Rs.10,50,000/- for the purchase of the bus with registered No.KL35 A 6996,agreeing to repay the loan in 79 EMIs at the rate of Rs.28,000/- and accordingly paid Rs.7,70,838/- by several instalments. On 26.02.2022 the opposite party insisted to rechart the loan for Rs.1,38,3803/- as per agreement of loan account No.XVFPKGD00004593239. There after the complainant paid a total amount of Rs.1,60,748/- by the way of EMIs.In spite of this,the opposite party visited the house of the complainant and threatened to seize the vehicle, by demanding additional amounts. Even though the interest fixed at the time of loan was at the rate of 8.5 % per annum, the opposite party demanded14% interest.The opposite party is demanding excess amount and abusing the complainant over phone and by visiting her house. The complainant purchased the Bus for eking out her lively hood out of its income. Demanding excess amount and threatening to seize the vehicle illegally is service deficiency on the part of the opposite party, due to which the complainant suffered mental agony. Hence this complaint is filed for a direction to the opposite party to settle the loan account as per the terms and condition of the loan agreement and to pay Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation and Rs.25,000/-as cost.
The notice sent to the opposite part was duly served but they remained absent. The name of the opposite party was called and set exparte.
The complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and documents Ext A1 to A4are marked. The document Ext.A1 is RC of the bus No..KL14-A-6996 in the name of the Complainant, Ext.A2 is the Account Statement of the loan No. XVFPKGD00004593239 for 26-02-2022 to 27.10.2022, Ext.A3(1) is a Payment Receipt dated 28.10.2022, Ext A3(2) dated 03/12/2022, Ext.A4 is the Account Statement of the loan No. XSHUKGD00002850097 from13-03-2019 to 27.10.2022.
Based on the pleadings and evidence of the rival parties in this case the followingissues are framed for consideration.
- Whether there is any service deficiency on the part of the opposite parties?
2. If so, what is the relief ?
For convenience, all these issues are considered together. Here the specific case of the complainant is that the opposite party is demanding excess amount and abusing the complainant over phone and by visiting her house.Out of Rs.10,50,000/- loan amount obtained for the purchase of the bus, she paid Rs.7,70,838/- by several instalments. On 26.02.2022 the opposite party insisted to rechart the loan for Rs.1,38,3803/- as per agreement of loan account No. XVFPKGD00004593239. There after the complainant paid a total amount of Rs.1,60,748/- by the way of EMIs.Inspite of this,the opposite party visited the house of the complainant and threatened to seize the vehicle, by demanding additional amounts.Even though the interest fixed at the time of loan was at the rate of 8.5 % per annum, the opposite party demanded 14% interest.
The complainant filed IA 365/22 for injunction, restraining the opposite party from illegally seizing the bus, which was allowed on condition that the complainant should pay Rs.35,000/- towards loan dues. Accordingly the complainant paid the amount complying the order and produced the receipt, which is marked as Ext.A3.
Here the loan agreement showing rate of interest and the other details of the loan is not before this commission. The complainant did not care to produce such documents nor taken steps to cause production of them. The available documents show that there is some amount still in due and the loan is not closed.
The complainant further submits that the opposite party, instead of collecting the loan amount along with agreed interest, is demanding excess amount and abusing the complainant over phone and by visiting her house.The complainant submits that even though the interest fixed at the time of loan was at the rate of 8.5 % per annum, the opposite party demanded 14% interest.
Demanding interest at a rate higher than the rate stipulated in the loan agreement and abusing the complainant over phone and by visiting her housewould amount to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,and in the absence of rebuttal evidence, this commission is of the view that there is unfair trade practice and service deficiency on the part of the opposite party, due to which the complainant suffered mental agony.
The complainant’s prayer is to direct the opposite party to settle the loan account as per the terms and condition of the loan agreement and to pay Rs. 3,00,000/- as compensation and Rs.25,000/-as cost. To direct the opposite party to settle the loan account as per the terms and condition of the loan agreement is reasonable. But the complainant did not produce evidence to show that he had suffered loss of such a huge amount as Rs.3,00,000/-. She did not furnish the details of the excess amount towards interest, if any, already collected from her.
Therefore this commission is inclined to allow a nominal amount towards compensation for mental agony. An amount of Rs.10,000/- would be a reasonable compensation in this case.
In the result, the complaint is allowed in part, directing the opposite party to settle the loan account as per the terms and condition of the loan agreement and to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) as compensation and Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) as cost.
Time for compliance is 30 days on receipt of the copy of this judgment.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1- Copy of R.C
A2- Account statement
A3-1 & 2 – Payment receipts
A4- Account statement
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Assistant Registrar
Ps/
