Kerala

Kannur

CC/250/2018

Brijesh.K - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager,Kerala Gramin Bank - Opp.Party(s)

18 Aug 2023

ORDER

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
KANNUR
 
Complaint Case No. CC/250/2018
( Date of Filing : 18 Sep 2018 )
 
1. Brijesh.K
Kollakkattil Veedu,S/o Late Sadanandan,Cherukara,Panniyoor,Pallivayal.P.O,Thaliparamba,Kannur-670142.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Branch Manager,Kerala Gramin Bank
Karimbam Branch,P.O.Karimbam,Thaliparamba,Kannur-670142.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. RAVI SUSHA PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Moly Kutty Mathew MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Sajeesh. K.P MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 18 Aug 2023
Final Order / Judgement

SMT.MOLYKUTTY MATHEW : MEMBER

        This is a complaint filed by the complainant U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986  for an order directing  the OP to refund Rs.36,479/-  with  interest to the complainant and to pay compensation for mental agony of the complainant for the deficiency of service on his part.

The brief of the complaint :

   The complainant had availed a Kissan credit  card loan of Rs.3,00,000/- from OP’s bank on  28/12/2015 and the loan to be renewed  on 28/12/2015.  The term of loan is 5 years and is a  subsidized loan also. The loan to be renewed  on 28/12/2016 and then the complainant renewed  the loan and remitted the  amount as  subsidy rate.  Thereafter the next renewal date belongs to 27/12/2017.  On 27/12/2017 the complainant approached OP’s bank for renewal  the loan and remitted the interest amount as Rs.48,476/-.  But the OP’s bank not allowed the interest  subvention to the complainant.  The complainant was lost Rs.36,479/- his incentive interest  subsidy for prompt repayment.  Then the complainant enquired the  matter to OP’s bank and they stated that 3% subsidy is not credited to complainant’s account and he was not eligible to get the incentive interest subsidy.  Moreover he paid 12% interest to the loan for 2 years also.  Thereafter on 6/1/2018 the complainant send a letter to OP to get the interest subvention.  The OP replied that the complainant defaulted to comply with the terms of the agreement and he is  not eligible for the  interest subvention.  In the Kissan credit card loan scheme the borrower has to remit the entire interest with principal amount within one year from the date of disbursement of the amount in order to renew the transaction.  Then only the borrower would be entitled to get the incentive  for prompt  repayment.  But  the complainant lostRs.36,479/-  the subsidy interest  only due to the negligence of the OP.  So the complainant lost the  incentive interest subsidy for repayment.  The act of  OP,  the complainant caused much mental agony and financial loss.  So there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP.  Hence the complaint.

       After filing the complaint notice issued to OP.  After receiving notice  OP entered before the commission  and filed his written version .  The OP contended that  in the KCC loan scheme the borrower has to remit the entire  interest with principal amount within one year from the date of  disbursement of the amount.  Then only the  borrower would be entitled to get the interest  subvention.  In case of default in repayment as agreed  the borrower  has to pay interest at the prevailing rate, for the time being in force.  The complainant has availed the loan  on 28/12/2015 and as such  he was bound to pay the interest and the principal amount within the stipulated period of one year  he  was not  eligible to get the incentive interest subsidy for prompt repayment.  The complainant is not entitled for any relief sought in the complaint.  There is  no deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP and the complaint is not maintainable. Then  the  complaint may be dismissed.

      On the basis  of the rival contentions by the pleadings the  following  issues  were framed for consideration.

  1. Whether there is  any deficiency of service   on the part of the opposite parties?
  2. Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief?  
  3. Relief and cost.

     The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and  Exts. A1 to A5 were marked . On OP’s side DW1 was examined  and no documents marked.

Issue No.1: 

          The  Complainant  adduced evidence before the commission by submitting  his chief affidavit in lieu of  his chief examination to the tune of the pleadings in the complaint and denying the  contentions in the version.  He was cross examined as PW1 by  OP. The documents  Exts.A1 to  A5 were marked on his  part  to substantiate his case. According to the  complainant, he has availed a KCC loan of Rs.3,00,000/- on 28/12/2015 from OP’s bank.  Then the complainant renewed the loan on 28/12/2016.  Thereafter on 27/12/2017 the complainant approached OP’s bank for renewal of the loan  and he remitted an amount of Rs.48,476/- as the interest.  But the OP’s bank not allowed the interest subvention to the complainant. The complainant was lost Rs.36,479/- the interest incentive subsidy .  In Ext.A1 on 27/12/2017 the OP  send  a letter to the complainant to renewal of KCC A/c No.40493131000964 on 28/12/2015 and the  account is due for renewal  on 28/12/2017.  The balance outstanding in the account as on date is Rs.348479/- and to renew the KCC account before due date . In Ext.A2 the  complainant send a letter to Regional Manager of  OP regarding the 3% subsidy and he remitted Rs.48476/-.  The complainant paid 12% interest to the loan for 2 years.  In Ext.A3 the complainant send a lawyer notice to OP and stated that he is eligible to get the incentive interest subsidy of KCC loan.  But the OP not allowed the subsidy the  complainant lost Rs.36,479/- as the interest subsidy.  In Ext.A5 is the statement of account for the period of  28/12/2015 to 27/12/2017.  It clearly shows that the complainant renewed the loan and he was lost Rs.36,479/-, the interest incentive subsidy.  In the evidence of PW1 who deposed that “ കാലാവധി തീരുന്നതിന് മുൻപ് നിങ്ങൾ മുതലും പലിശയും അടച്ച് loan പുതുക്കിയിട്ടുണ്ടോ? പലിശ അടച്ച് പുതുക്കി ഒരു വർഷത്തേയ്ക്കു നീട്ടി ” Moreover in the evidence of DW1, he stated that “പലിശ അടയ്ക്കുമ്പോൾ subsidy കഴിച്ചുള്ള  തുക അടച്ചാൽ മതി ? ശരിയാണ്. 28/12/2016 ന് 13000/- രൂപ credit ചെയ്തിട്ടുണ്ട് Ext.A5 ൽ? ശരിയാണ്. ഇത് ആ വായ്പയുടെ ഒരു വർഷത്തെ subsidy കഴിച്ചുള്ള പലിശയാണ്?  അതെ.പലിശ മാത്രം അടച്ച് വായ്പ പുതുക്കാൻ സാധിക്കും എന്നുള്ളതുകൊണ്ടാണ് പ്രസ്തുത തുക വാങ്ങിയതെന്ന് പറഞ്ഞാൽ? ശരിയല്ല. പിന്നെ എന്തിനാണ് പലിശ അടച്ചത്. പാർട്ടി വന്ന് പലിശ മാത്രം അടച്ചു.  ആയതിൽ നിങ്ങൾക്ക് തർക്കമില്ലായിരുന്നു. വായ്പ കുടിശ്ശിക ആയാൽ 3 മാസത്തിനുള്ളിൽ   ക്ക് defaulterക്ക് notice അയക്കും? ശരിയാണ്. ഈ കേസ്സിൽ അന്യായക്കാരന് അതിനിടയിൽ യാതൊരു demand noticeഉം അയച്ചില്ല  എന്ന് പറഞ്ഞാൽ? File നോക്കിയാലെ പറയാൻ പറ്റുകയുള്ളൂ . വായ്പ പുതുക്കുക എന്നു വച്ചാൽ വായ്പയ്ക്ക് subsidy അർഹതയുണ്ട് എന്ന് തന്നെയാണ്? ശരിയാണ്. 27/12/2017 ന് പരാതിക്കാരൻ മുതലും നാളിതുവരെയുള്ള പലിശയും ചേർത്ത് 348476/- രൂപ അടച്ചിട്ടുണ്ട്? ശരിയാണ്.  യാതൊരു subsidy യും ആ സമയത്ത് പരാതിക്കാരന് നല്കിയിട്ടില്ല? ഇല്ല. 2015-2016 വർഷത്തെ അനുവദിക്കേണ്ടിയിരുന്ന subsidy യും 2016-2017 വർഷത്തെ subsidy ഇല്ലാത്ത മുഴുവൻ പലിശയും ഉൾപ്പെടെയാണ് 48,476/- രൂപ ഈടാക്കിയത്? ശരിയാണ്.  So the complainant is not obtained the incentive interest subsidy.  So we hold that the OP is  directly bound to redressal the grievance caused to the complainant.  So that there is deficiency of service  and unfair trade practice on the part of  opposite party .  Hence the issue No.1 found in favour of the complainant and  answered accordingly.

Issue Nos.2&3:

        As discussed above the, the complainant  remitted Rs.48476/- on 27/12/2017.  But the OP’s bank not allowed incentive interest subsidy.  So the OP is liable to refund the interest subsidy to the complainant.  Therefore we hold that the OP is liable to pay Rs.36,479/- with 9% interest from the date of complaint till realization to the complainant along with Rs.6000/- as compensation for mental agony caused to the complainant and Rs.4000/- as litigation cost. Thus  the issue No.2&3 are also accordingly answered. 

          In the result the complaint is allowed in part  directing the  opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.36,479/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of complaint till realization to the complainant along with Rs.6000/- as compensation for mental agony caused to the complainant and Rs.4000/- as litigation cost within  30 days of  receipt  of this order. In default the amount of Rs.36,479/- carries 12% interest per annum from the date of complaint till realization.  Failing which the  complainant is at liberty to  execute  the  order as  per the  provisions  of Consumer Protection Act 2019.

Exts:

A1- Reply notice

A2-Notice  to OP issued by complainant

A3-Notice to OP by complainant

A4- postal receipt

A5- ledger copy of account.

PW1- Brijeesh.K-complainant

DW1-Hari.M.P-OP

Sd/                                                             Sd/                                                   Sd/

PRESIDENT                                             MEMBER                                               MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                       Molykutty Mathew                                    Sajeesh K.P

eva           

                                                                       /Forwarded by Order/

                                                                   ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. RAVI SUSHA]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Moly Kutty Mathew]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sajeesh. K.P]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.