DATE OF FILING : 3.7.2015

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES  REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the  28th   day of   July,  2017

Present :

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR PRESIDENT

SRI. BENNY. K. MEMBER

CC NO.208/2015

Between

Complainant       :   Valsa Laiju, 

Ellickal House,

  Vannappuram P.O.,

Idukki.

(By Adv: K.P. Subair)

And

Opposite Parties                                        :   1. The General Manager, 

    Urban Co-operative Bank, 

    Thodupuzha,

    Idukki.

2. The Branch Manager,

    Urban Co-operative Bank,

    Vannappuram Branch,

    Vannappuram, Idukki.

3. The Special Sale Officer,

     Thodupuzha Urban Co-operative 

                                                                                           Bank (Group),

    Co-operative Assistant Registrar (G)

Office,

    Thodupuzha, Idukki.

    (All by Adv:  E. Abdul Rahim)

 

O R D E R

 

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR, PRESIDENT

Case of the complainant is that,

        Complainant availed a loan of Rs.50,000/- from the opposite party bank as No.130/06 agreed to repay with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.  Eventhough the complainant remitted the major share of the loan amount, the opposite party bank not included in the loan account and charged exorbitant amount as interest and demanded to pay back the loan arrears at a tune of Rs.94,475/-.  This amount contains high interest along 

(cont....2)

- 2  -

with penal interest and compound interest.  For recovering the loan dues, opposite party bank issued notice to the complainant demanding to pay the said amount on or before 15.6.2015, otherwise they will initiate steps to attach the property of the complainant as well as the guarantor.  Complainant further pleaded that, when the complainant approached the bank and enquired about such a heavy dues, the authorities replied that it includes other charges.  When she demanded the loan statement, the opposite party bank was reluctant to issue such a statement to the complainant and  against this, the complainant approached the Forum and filed this complaint alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice from the part of  opposite party bank.  

        On notice, opposite party entered appearance and filed detailed version.  In their version, opposite party contended that the complainant availed loan on 24.8.20106 and so far she remitted an amount of Rs.31,000/- and the loan period ended on 24.8.2007.  Each and every time of default in repayment, the opposite party bank intimated the matter to the complainant, but she did not turned up to clear the dues.  At last bank issued demand notice to the complainant demanding to pay an amount of Rs.94.475/- as loan dues till 15.6.2015.  Each and every amount remitted by the complainant is accounted and issued receipts.  Hence the contrary averments are false and baseless and no deficiency in service is attributed against the opposite party.

        No oral evidence is adduced by both the parties.  Complainant produced demand notice dated 15.6.2015 and opposite party produced statement of account of the complainant's loan account. 

        Heard both sides.

        The point for consideration is whether there is any deficiency in service from the part of opposite parties and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?

 

(cont....3)

- 3  -

        The POINT :-  We had gone through the documents carefully and considered that the loan was granted in the year 2006 and the duration of the loan is one year.  It is also not challenged the complainant that as per the loan account statement, the complainant had remitted only an amount of Rs.31,000/- till 30.6.2015.  It means that the complainant is a chronic defaulter and also no material evidence is produced before the Forum to establish their plea that the amount which remitted by the complainant as stated in the complaint  was not included in the loan amount. The best evidence is to produce the receipts of remittance and to verify it with the loan statement.  Here complainant failed to do so.  

Since there is no merit in this case, the Forum directs the opposite party to include the above said loan in OTS scheme and allow the complainant to close the loan account as such.  No order to cost or compensation.

      Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 28th day of July, 2017

       Sd/-

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR, PRESIDENT

        Sd/-

SRI. BENNY. K., MEMBER

 

 

 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

Nil.

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1            -  Demand Notice.

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil.

           

                 Forwarded by Order,

 

 

 

                SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT