D.of. F:24 /2/2012

D. of O: 25/6/2012

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                       CC.NO.47/2012

                           Dated this, the 25th day of June 2012

PRESENT:

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                        : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                 : MEMBER

SMT.BEENA.K.G                                    : MEMBER 

1.Smt.Kaijumma,

2.Aysha,

3.Davood

No.1 is the wife of Late Ibrahim and  No.2&3

 are the children of Late Ibrahim and are

R/at Umblathody  House, Po.Meeyapadavu,Kasaragod,                 :Complainants

(Adv. Geetha N.V Hosdurg)

1.The Manager, North Malabar Gramin  Bank,

 Meeyapadavu Branch ,PO. Meeyapadavu ,Kasaragod.

(Adv. M Narayanan Bhat,Kasaragod)

2. The Assistant Manager, Reserve Bank of India,                     :  Opposite parties

 Rural Planning & Credit Department,

Bekary Junction,   P.B.No.6507, Thiruvananthapuram.

                                                                    ORDER

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ         : PRESIDENT

   Complainants are agriculturists who availed agricultural loans from  the Ist opposite party Bank.  But successive natural calamities and fall in price of  agrarian products resulted in  crop loss and complainant could not repay the amount.  Therefore the bank has initiated recovery proceedings against the property of the complainants.  According to  the  complainants their loan ought to have been waived as per the Agriculture Debt Waiver Relief Scheme  formulated by the Central Govt. in 2008.  But opposite party did not give the benefits of the said scheme to the complainants.    It is also the case of complainant Nos 2&3 that they availed jewel loans as AJL 910/09.  AJL 865/09 on 21/8/09 and  it  was renewed on 28/2/11.  Later when complainant Nos 2&3 approached the Ist opposite party with principal amount and interest, Ist opposite party refused to close the loan and return the gold ornaments weighing 30 sovereigns.  In reply to the lawyer notice Ist opposite party stated that gold ornaments pledged in Jewel A/c 875/09 by complainant No.3 was sold in public auction on 17/3/2011 and realized  `174596/- and out of sale proceeds `96747/- was credited in the said jewel loan account and the balance amount `77849/-  was credited in loan account KC 70/05 and only the balance amount is claimed as per notice dated 14/10/11.  Therefore the complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.

2.     Ist opposite party the  main contesting opposite party in their version has stated that they have given all benefits to the complainants as per law  and deducted the amount due to the bank as per the scheme and the recovery proceedings are initiated  only for the balance amount and there is no deficiency in service  on their part.   As against the allegation that gold ornaments of complainants were sold in public auction the  opposite parties contended that the gold ornaments pledged by the complainant No.2 alone  is  sold in auction and for that they have complied all the formalities.  The jewel loan of the complainant No.2 is  still pending and complainant No.2 can pay the arrears due to the bank and take back the gold ornaments.

3.     Both sides heard. 

4.     In the case of pledging gold ornaments and selling it on auction after complying the legal formalities we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party bank.

5.   In the matter of  Agriculture Debt Waiver, in a similar case the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in WPC Nos. 12552, 12554,12569,and  12570/2011 has  directed the beneficiaries  of the said Agriculture Debt Waiver and Debt Relief  Scheme 2008 to approach the Grievance Redressal officer  for ventilating their grievance in terms of the circular of NABARD explaining the directions for  granting the Debt Waiver Relief  to the beneficiaries. Clause 10-3 of the  said scheme envisages that the beneficiaries of the said scheme can approach the Grievance Redressal Officer for the redressal of their grievances if they have a contention  that their names were not included in the  lists or the relief calculated is  wrong.

5.   In view  of the above,  we direct the complainant to approach the Grievance Redressal  Officer within one month from the date of receipt of copy of order.  The Grievance Redressal  Officer  shall consider representation and dispose the same expeditiously.  Till the disposal of the said representation all further proceedings for recovery of the amounts involved in agricultural loans availed by the complainant shall be kept in abeyance.  It is made clear that if no representation is filed by the complainant as stipulated within the time mentioned above, then the opposite parties shall be free to continue recovery proceedings initiated by them.  In the issue of auctioning gold ornaments pledged we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.  Hence the prayer of the complainants   to credit `77849/-   in the jewel a/c of complainant No.3 is declined.

        The complaint is disposed as above.

MEMBER                                 MEMBER                                              PRESIDENT

eva