Haryana

Karnal

352/2011

Naresh Kumar S/o Nihal Chand - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Krishna Cooperative House Building Society Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sanjey Singla

14 Dec 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.  

                                                               Complaint No.352 of 2011

                                                             Date of instt.:13.06.2011

                                                              Date of decision:14.12.2016

 

Naresh Kumar son of Shri Nihal Chand, aged about 55 years, resident of House no.352, Sector-14, U.E. Karnal.a

 

                                                                   ……..Complainant.

                                      Vs.

1.The Krishna Co-op House Building Society Ltd., at present having its office at Bhasin Communication, Hansi Road Chowk, Sant Nagar, Karnal through its President/Secretary.

2. The Haryana State Co-operative Housing Federation Ltd., Bayas no.49-52, Sector-2, Panchkula (Haryana), through Managing Director.

 

                                                                   ………… Opposite Parties.

 

                     Complaint u/s 12  of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before                   Sh.K.C.Sharma……….President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

Present:-      Sh. Sanjay Singla Advocate for the complainant.

                    Sh. Jaswant Singh Advocate for the Opposite party no.2

                    Opposite party no.1 already exparte.

                  

 ORDER:

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer protection Act 1986, on the averments that in the year 1985 he obtained loan of Rs.40,000/- from “The Jyoti Co-op H/B Society Ltd., Karnal”  for construction of his house. The loan was to carry interest at the rate of 14% per annum and the same was repayable in 80 equal quarterly installments of Rs.1583.20 each commencing from the month of May 1986. The loan installments were duly paid by him from time to time. He had deposited a sum of Rs.85,577/- with “The Jyoti Co-op H/B Society Ltd., Karnal”. Thereafter, said society merged into the Krishna Coop. Housing Building Society Ltd. i.e. opposite party no.1 and he deposited an amount of Rs.66,095/- with opposite party no.1. Thus, he had deposited a total amount of Rs.1,51,672/- in his loan account. An amount of Rs.2800/- was kept as share money by “The Jyoti Co-op H/B Society Ltd., Karnal” at the time of advancing the loan and same was refundable to him alongwith interest thereon at the time of full and final settlement of the loan account. He  had mortgaged his plot no.352, Sector-14 U.E. Karnal with “The Jyoti Co-op H/B Society Ltd., Karnal” for obtaining the aforesaid loan. After making payment to opposite party no.1 he requested the opposite parties on different occasions for return of the original mortgage deed, loan file, redemption papers and to issue “No Dues Certificate”, but the opposite parties did not accede to his request. However, he received a letter from opposite party no.1 asking him to appear on 18.01.2011 he visited the office of opposite party no.1 on that date, but no one was found there. In this way there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties which caused him mental pain, agony and harassment.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to opposite parties. Initially Shri Rajesh Kumar Secretary for opposite party no.1 appeared on some dates and submitted reply/written statement alongwith account statement. In reply, it was submitted that “The Jyoti Co-op H/B Society Ltd., Karnal” had merged in opposite party no.1 on 5.3.1999. The complainant deposited installments in the society upto 13.11.2004 and on 16.4.2012 an amount of Rs.37,962/- was due towards him. Lateron none turned up on behalf of opposite party no.1.

3.                Opposite party no.2 put into appearance and filed separate written statement controverting the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that the complainant has no locus standi and cause of action to file the complaint; that the complaint is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties; that the complaint is not legally maintainable; that the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum; that the complaint is an abuse of process of law; that this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaint as per provisions of section 102/103 of the Haryana Coop. Societies Act and that the complaint is bad for want of notice under section 124 of the Haryana Coop. Societies Act.

                   On merits, it has been pleaded that the complainant has paid the total amount of Rs.51,347.68P in all. A sum of Rs.1,63,866.87P  was outstanding against him on 31.07.2011. Till the entire amount was paid, the documents could not be released. Thus, there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

3.                In evidence of the complainant, his affidavit Ex.C1 and documents Ex. C2 to C73 have been tendered.

4.                On the other hand in evidence of the opposite party no.2, affidavit of Bhaje Singh, Development Officer EX.O1 and copy of statement of account Ex.O2  have been tendered.

5.                We have appraised the evidence on record, the material circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

6.                The complainant had obtained loan from “The Jyoti Co-op H/B Society Ltd., Karnal” in the year 1985 for construction of his house and for that purpose he had mortgaged his plot no.352 sector 14 Urban Estate Karnal. The said society merged into opposite party no.1 on 5.3.1999. As per the case of the complainant he had deposited an amount of Rs.85,577/- with The Jyoti Co-op H/B Society Ltd., Karnal and thereafter Rs.66,095/- with opposite party no.1. On the other hand it has been submitted by opposite party no.2 that the complainant has failed to repay the loan amount alongwith interest thereon and an amount of Rs.1,63,886.87P was due towards him on 31.7.2011. Thus, the main question which falls for consideration is whether the complainant had paid the entire loan amount or some amount is still due against him.

7.                 The complainant has produced the details of the amount deposited by him in his loan account and the receipts Ex.C2 to Ex.C71 regarding such deposits. He has also produced the copy of the letter of opposite party no.1 Ex.C73, according to which he was asked to appear before the Managing Committee of the Society on 18.1.2011. In the said letter, the defaulting amount upto 1.5.2012 was mentioned as Rs.33036/-. As per the written statement of opposite party no.1 an amount of Rs.37,962/- was due towards the complainant upto 16.04.2012. The statement of account duly signed by the Secretary of opposite party no.1 is also lying on the file. Though the same has not been tendered in evidence, yet can be taken into consideration, because this Forum is to follow summary procedure and no formal proof of any document is required. According to the said statement of account an amount of Rs.37,962/- was due towards the complainant upto 16.4.2012. The complainant has also produced the receipt Ex.C74 regarding payment of Rs.one lac by him to opposite party no.1 on 31.3.2016.These documents are sufficient to prove that the complainant had almost repaid the entire loan amount to opposite party no.1.

8.                Opposite party no.2 has claimed that the complainant has failed to repay the loan amount alongwith interest thereon and the copy of the statement of account Ex.O2 has been produced in this regard, according to which an amount of Rs.2,90,044/- was outstanding against the complainant upto 31.7.2011.  If, the amount deposited by the complainant with opposite party no.1 was not transferred to opposite party no.2, the complainant cannot be made to suffer on that account. In such a situation, the opposite party no.2 can take appropriate proceedings in accordance with the law against opposite party no.1 for recovery of the balance amount, if any. After payment of the entire loan amount, the opposite parties were bound to return to his title deed and redeem his plot. In this regard sustenance may be sought from the decision of the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana in case titled as The Haryana State Cop-operative Housing Federation Ltd. Vs. Satnam Kaur and another first appeal no.1101 of 2007 decided on 16.7.2007, wherein a similar question arose and it was held that after depositing the entire loan amount with opposite party no.1, it was the responsibility of opposite party no.1 to have deposited the outstanding amount in the account of the complainant with opposite party no.2 and default in this regard committed by opposite party no.1 cannot shift the responsibility upon the complainant. On failure of the opposite party no.1 to discharge its liability bilateral agreement entered into between the opposite party no.1 and the opposite party no.2, the title deed of the complainant cannot be retained by the opposite party no.2. If, the opposite party no.2 is allowed to retain the title deed of the complainant upto the time the liability incurred by the opposite party no.1 from the opposite party no.2 is discharged, that would injure the rights of the complainant, because he would be at the mercy and the sweet will of the opposite party no.2 and it would definitely result in harassment to the complainant.

9.                In view of the foregoing discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the opposite party no.2 to issue the “No Dues Certificate” after adjusting the amount of Rs.one lac deposited by the complainant in his loan account on 31.3.2016 on calculating the interest on the outstanding loan amount of Rs.37,962/- on 16.4.2012. If, any further amount of interest on the said amount is due the same may be recovered from the complainant before issuance of the “No Dues Certificate”, but in case it is found that the complainant had deposited excess amount, than the interest calculated on the outstanding loan amount of Rs.37,962/- on 16.4.2012, then the same be also refunded to him. Opposite party no.2 is directed to return the original title deed of the complainant and redeem his plot bearing no.352 Sector 14 Urban Estate Karnal from mortgage within a period of 30 days from the date of issuance of “No Dues Certificate” by opposite party no.1. We further direct the opposite party no.2 to pay Rs.5500/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him and for the litigation expenses. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated: 14.12.2016

                                                                                      (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                                         President,

                                                                             District Consumer Disputes

                                                                             Redressal Forum, Karnal.

                             (Anil Sharma)

                               Member