Karnataka

Kolar

CC/12/2018

Sri.Sridhar.V.C - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager.Muthoot Finance - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.Fayaz Ahmed

27 Jun 2018

ORDER

Date of Filing: 21/02/2018

Date of Order: 27/06/2018

BEFORE THE KOLAR DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, D.C. OFFICE PREMISES, KOLAR.

 

Dated: 27^th DAY OF JUNE 2018

PRESENT

SRI. K.N. LAKSHMINARAYANA, B.Sc., LLB., PRESIDENT

SMT. A.C. LALITHA, BAL, LLB.,  ……  LADY MEMBER

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 12 OF 2018

Sri. Sridhar.V.C.

S/o. Chandrappa,

Major, R/at: B Block,

Vemgal Village & Hobli,

Kolar Taluk.                                                                      ….  COMPLAINANT.

(Rep. by Sri.Fayaz Ahamed, Advocate)

 

- V/s –

The Manager,

Muthoot Finance,

Vemgal Branch,

Kolar Taluk.

(Rep. by Sri. K. Narandra Babu, Advocate)                …. OPPOSITE PARTY.

 

-: ORDER:-

BY SRI. K.N. LAKSHMINARAYANA, PRESIDENT,

01.   The complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite party Under Section 11 & 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to direct the OP to return the pledged ornaments of the complainant or to pay the present market value of the gold ornaments by deducting the principal and interest amount.

 

02.   The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that, on 24.10.2016 complainant had pledged some golden ornaments with the OP for a sum of Rs.30,000/- vide loan account No. MGL.177.  The OP surprisingly without the knowledge of the complainant and without issuing any prior notice had closed the gold loan account by auctioning the said gold ornaments on 11.11.2017.  The said fact was come to the knowledge of the complainant.  On 20.09.2017 the complainant visited the OP’s office to get back the said golden ornaments which was pledged with the OP by making payment of both principal and interest amount, but the OP authority issued auction notice to him.  The said auction took place behind the back of the complainant and is not accordance with law.  The complainant issued legal notice dated: 06.12.2017 to the OP, but OP has failed to comply the same and hence this complaint.

 

03.   Along with the complaint the complainant has submitted following 04 documents:-

(i) Certified copy of the gold loan specific detail report.

(ii) Gold auction instructions copy

(iii) Legal Notice Copy

(iv) Postal Receipt.

 

04.   In response to the notice issued by this Forum the learned counsel appearing for OP has filed its version on 17.04.2018 and admitted the allegations made at para-2 of the complaint are admitted and the allegations made at para-3 of the complaint are denied.  Further the OP has contended that, on 24.10.2016 the complainant had obtained gold loan of Rs.30,000/- by pleadging golden ornaments i.e., (i) golden ring weighting 3,200 milligrams, Oole and Mattis weighing 11 Grams vide Loan account No.04016/MGL/000177 for 06 months duration, the complainant has also accepted the rate of interest at 22% if he pay back within 01 month from the date of obtaining the loan and if it exceeds 01 month the rate of interest shall be levied at 24%.  The complainant has also attested his signature on the printed loan form by accepting the terms and conditions mentioned thereon.  The complainant after lapse of 06 months i.e., 24.04.2017 has not paid the principal and interest amount nor come forward to settle the loan amount in spite of giving information to his mobile number and so also the OP had sent several SMS messages and had made several calls through phone but the complainant did not come forward to make payment of the outstanding amount. 

 

(a)    Further OP has contended that, as per the directions given by its Head Office the OP has issued auction notice to the complainant’s address to pay a sum of Rs.37,389/- in all through RPAD and the same was received by K.B. Sandhya but the complainant has failed to pay the said amount.  Hence the pleadged golden ornaments were auctioned on 20.09.2017 by the OP as per the terms and conditions given in the loan application form.  The complainant has falsely stated that, he has approached the OP to get back his pleadged golden ornaments by paying the outstanding loan amount.  So contending, the OP has prayed this forum for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary costs.

 

05.   Along with the version the OP has also submitted 04 documents as follows:-

(i) Copy of the Loan application.

(ii) Reply letter given to the legal notice

(iv) Postal receipt towards reply letter

(v) Acknowledgment for receiving reply letter.

 

06.   On 24.05.2018 the learned counsel appearing for the complainant has submitted complainant’s affidavit by way of examination-in-chief and on 01.06.2018 the learned counsel appearing for OP has also filed affidavit evidence of one Sri. Nagarjuna, S/o. Venkatachalapathy, the Branch Manager, by way of examination-in-chief.   On 08.06.2018 the learned counsel appearing for OP has also filed its written arguments.

 

07.   We have heard the oral arguments on both sides. 

 

08.   Now the points that do arise for our consideration are that:-

POINT NO.1:-   Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of OP?

 

POINT NO.2:-   Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed by him?

 

POINT NO.3:-   What order?

 

09.   Our findings on the above points are that:-

POINT NOs.1 & 2:-  In the Negative

POINT NO.3:-   As per the final order

                                        for the following:-

 

REASONS

10.   POINT NOS.1 & 2:-  These points are taken up together for discussion to avoid the repetition of facts.  The complainant has stated that, he has pleadged some golden ornaments with the OP on 24.10.2016 for Rs.30,000/- and the OP has closed the said gold loan account by auctioning the said gold ornaments without his knowledge and without issuing any notice to him.  But on the other hand the OP has stated that, the complainant has pleadged 14.200 grams of golden ornaments for Rs.30,000/- with the OP on 24.10.2016 bearing gold loan account No.04016/MGL/000177 and the complainant has put his signature to the said loan application form by admitting the terms and conditions thereon.  The OP has produced the copy of the said loan application Form before the forum which reveals about the details of the pleadged golden ornaments with mode of interest and the tenure of the loan under the said scheme and which is only for 06 months. 

 

11.   The complainant did not pay the interest nor the principal amount in spite of lapse of 06 months duration.  The OP has issued auction intimation notice to the complainant’s address dated: 25.07.2017 through RPAD and the same was received by one K.B. Sandhya on 14.08.2017 and in spite of that, the complainant did not contacted the OP.  The OP has also produced the said acknowledgment for receipt of the said intimation notice before this Forum.  The complainant after receipt of the said notice also, the complainant did not repay the loan amount and thereafter the OP has auctioned the said golden ornaments on 20.09.2017. The complainant has produced the copy of the auction notice intimation as per Annexure-2 in the said auction intimation notice the entire details of the pleadged gold loan has been noted.  The total recovery of the amount is Rs.37,389/- including up to date interest.  The 1^st Auction date was on 01.07.2017 and on that day the complainant has not approached the OP and thereafter the OP has auctioned the complainant’s pleadged golden ornaments on 20.09.2017 for Rs.36,033/- and the balance is of Rs.1,497/- is to be payable by the complainant.  The OP has produced copy of the said intimation letter.  Hence the said auction sale is in accordance with the procedure and it is not behind the back of the complainant.  As the OP has auctioned the pleadged golden ornaments of the complainant and there is only a meager balance amount of Rs.1,497/- and the same is weaved off by this Forum in the interest of justice and equity.  The OP has also produced the paper for publishing the auction sale and there is no any deficiency of service by OP. 

 

12.  The complainant after auctioning the said golden ornaments, he has issued notice to the OP dated: 06.12.2017, the same has been replied by the OP on 08.12.2017.  The said notice issued by the complainant does not serve any purpose as the same is after auctioning the pleadged golden ornaments.  Hence as discussed above the entire contention taken by the complainant are all goes in vain.  The complainant has failed to prove the deficiency of service on the part of the OP and the complainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed by him.  Hence under these circumstances as discussed above we answer these point Nos.1 & 2 are in the negative.

 

POINT No.3:-

11.   In view of our findings on Point Nos. 1 & 2 and the discussions made thereon, we proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

01.   The complaint filed by the complainant is hereby dismissed with no costs.

 

02.   Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us on this 27^th DAY OF JUNE 2018)

 

 

LADY MEMBER                                PRESIDENT