West Bengal

Kolkata-I(North)

CC/10/264

Ms. Tapti Sengupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, G.E. Money Financial Services Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

18 May 2012

ORDER

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,
Unit-I, Kolkata
http://confonet.nic.in
 
Complaint Case No. CC/10/264
 
1. Ms. Tapti Sengupta
138/14, Baruipara Lane, Kolkata-700035.
Kolkata
West Bengal
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Manager, G.E. Money Financial Services Ltd.
6A, Middleton Street, Kolkata-700071.
Kolkata
West Bengal
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'ABLE MR. Sankar Nath Das PRESIDENT
  Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri MEMBER
  Smt. Sharmi Basu MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.

 

CDF/Unit-I/Case No.  264 / 2010.

 

1)                   Ms. Tapti Sengupta,

            138/14, Baruipara Lane, P.S. Baranagar, Alambazar, Kolkata-35.             ---------- Complainant

 

---Versus---

 

1)                   The Manager, G.E. Money Financial Services Ltd.,

            Chabildas Tower, Gr. Floor & 1st Floor,

6A, Middleton Street, Kolkata-700071.                                                    ---------- Opposite Party

 

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.

                        Smt. Sharmi Basu, Member

                                        

Order No.   18    Dated  18/05/2012.

 

            The petition of complaint has been filed by the complainant Ms. Tapti Sengupta against the o.p. G.E. Money Financial Service Ltd. The case of the complainant in short is that O.p. is a company and in the instant case a service provider / financer to the complainant. On 7.5.07 complainant was granted a loan by o.p. for Rs.33,000/- on conditions of repayment by 35 EMIs of Rs.1191/- disbursed through the loan account no.RCAR00275065 and she duly paid 3 installments starting from the month of May, 2007 through ECS drawn on the complainant’s banker, United Bank of India, Dunlop Bridge Branch. Thereafter, in the month of August, 2007 there were certain problems with the said banker of the complainant. Complainant   immediately verbally requested the o.p. not to process further ECS and instead to collect cash from her against the EMIs every month. Accordingly, admitting the said request of the complainant, from the fourth month i.e. the month of August, 2007, o.p. started collecting the respective EMIs every month in cash from complainant and issued due receipts there against except for the month of April, 2008 when despite he arrangement for cash payment, o.p. collected one EMI through ECS. However, thereafter o.p. without any deviation collected cash for the EMIs till last towards full and final payment. Also o.p. issued a computer generated statement dt.3.5.10 confirming the receipt of cash mentioning respective money receipt numbers and on payment of the last installment on 16.2.10 i.e. even one and half month before the last due date of payment, all the EMIs were paid by complainant. As per complainant to utter dismay, complainant received a notice dt.3.5.10 from o.p. claiming an amount of Rs,.27,541/- on account of cheque bouncing charges and penal charges, although, on receipt of instructions from complainant for not processing any further ECS and instead, for collecting EMIs in cash, o.p. duly started collecting EMIs in cash but wrongfully and deliberately continued to process the ECS for the EMIs and thereby harassed and caused loss of money and reputation to complainant.

            On receipt of such notice, complainant immediately spoke to o.p. who did not bother to accept their fault and withdraw their false claim. On the contrary, o.p. every now and then has been threatening complainant over phone that unless complainant immediately pays up their illegitimate claim for Rs.27,541/-, complainant will have to face dire consequence.

            As a result, o.p. created a state of grave worries and anxieties for complainant and has caused and has been has been continuously causing tremendous mental agony and paid without any fault on the part of complainant. Moreover, complainant has come to know from her enquiry with other banks for financial assistance that o.p. caused further damage to the reputation of complainant by forwarding complainant’s name to the Credit Information Bureau of India Ltd. (CIBIL) as a ‘defaulter’. This has caused tremendous loss of social standing to complainant as other banks have refused to even accept any application for loan from complainant.

            As a result, by threefold wrongful actions and gross deficiency in service of o.p., such as i) claiming absolutely illegitimate amount when there is no dues by complainant, ii) unnecessarily harassing and threatening the complainant and iii) by forwarding he complainant’s name to CIBIL as a ‘defaulter’, o.p. has caused great loss and injury and has been continuously causing irritation and agony to complainant. Hence, complainant has no alternative but to file the complaint before this Forum with the prayer contained in the prayer portion of petition of complaint.

            O.p. had entered its appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against it and ld. lawyer of o.p. in the course of argument strongly submitted that the instant case is not maintainable in this Forum and prayed for dismissal of the case.

Decision with reasons:

            We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. It is an admitted fact that complainant took loan of Rs.33,000/- and the monthly EMI was Rs.1191/- for 35 months starting from 7.5.07 to 7.3.10 and from the record we find that complainant has submitted documents showing payment of entire amount as against loan of Rs.33,000/- in 35 EMIs and we do not find any irregularity and / or discrepancy in same as against loan account no.RCAR00275065 vide annex-1 attached with the petition of complaint containing page 1-4. Therefore, we do not find any lapse on the part of complainant in the matter of making payment of loan amount together with interest accrued thereon. As such we find that o.p. had deficiency in the matter of discharging function being a service provider to its consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.

            Hence, ordered,

            That the petition of complaint is allowed on contest in part with cost against the o.p. O.p. is directed to issue “no due certificate” in favour of the complainant as against loan account no.RCAR00275065 and is further directed to issue a letter to Credit Information Bureau of India Ltd. requesting them to delete the name of the complainant from the list of defaulter and o.p. is further directed to pay to the complainant compensation of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) only for her harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.

Supply certified copy of this order to the parties.

 

 

 

        _____Sd-_____              ______Sd-______              ______Sd-______

          MEMBER                         MEMBER                       PRESIDENT

 

 

 
 
[HON'ABLE MR. Sankar Nath Das]
PRESIDENT
 
[ Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri]
MEMBER
 
[ Smt. Sharmi Basu]
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.