Complaint filed on: 13-01-2016 Disposed on: 02-12-2016
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL FORUM,
OLD DC OFFICE COMPOUND, TUMAKURU-572 101
CC.No.11/2016
DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF DECEMBER 2016
PRESENT
SMT.PRATHIBHA. R.K. BAL, LLM, PRESIDENT
SRI.D.SHIVAMAHADEVAIAH, B.A, LLB, MEMBER
SMT.GIRIJA, B.A., LADY MEMBER
Complainant: -
Sri.H.S.Gopalakrishna,
S/o. Late Siddaiah,
Aged about 28 years, residing at Habbathanahalli village, Mallasandra post,
Kasaba Hobli, Tumakuru taluk
(By Advocate Sri.H.G.Vasu)
V/s
Opposite party:-
The Manager,
Canara Bank,
Main Branch, Near KSRTC,
Bus Stand, Tumakuru city
(By Advocate Sri.G.S.Ramasesha)
ORDER
SMT.PRATHIBHA. R.K. PRESIDENT
This complaint has filed by the complainant against the OP, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. The complainant prays to direct the OP to return the original 10th Marks Card of the complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000=00 towards mental harassment, deficiency in service, loss of money and breach of contract along with 12% interest p.a. from the date of complaint till its realization, in the interest of justice and equity.
2. The brief facts of the complaint is as under.
The OP is the financial institution and doing financial business under banking norms. The complainant was one of the unemployed educated person. During the year 2007-08 to get the facility under PMRY scheme, the complainant approached the OP bank to sanction the loan under PMRY scheme for the purpose of flour mill to do his business and to eke out for his family necessity. After considering his approaches, the OP had granted a sum of Rs.75,000=00 vide loan account No.5222741011347 and he complainant IE number as 24934121. After availing the said loan amount, the complainant had established flour mill and doing business smoothly.
The complainant further submitted that, at the time of granting the said loan, for the security purpose, the OP had collected the original 10th marks card and kept the same in the custody of the OP bank. The complainant has settled the said loan amount before the Lok-Adalath under one time settlement scheme which was held on 13-10-2014 in case no.123/2014-15 and accordingly the complainant had paid the entire outstanding loan amount to the OP bank and the OP bank has issued No Objection Certificate on 4-2-2015.
The complainant further submitted that, the complainant had discharged the entire loan amount to the OP bank on 4-2-2015, but the OP bank has not returned the 10th original marks card of the complainant. The complainant had approached and requested the OP bank since 4-2-2015 by way of orally. Even inspite of all these efforts made by the complainant went in vain and the OP has been dodging the matter with one or the other pretext. Thereby the OP is disclosing his negligent act and also deficiency in service, since he ought to have return the 10th original marks card immediately after repayment of the loan amount.
The complainant further submitted that, due to non-availability of the 10th original marks card well in time. The complainant lost his further job opportunities from other firms and thereby the complainant has sustained mentally and financially. The complainant has issued a legal notice to the OP on 18-11-2015 calling upon the OP to hand over the 10th original marks card and the said notice was duly served on the OP, but the OP did not choose to comply the same. Hence the complainant has come up with the present complaint.
3. In response to the notice, the OP has appeared through his counsel and filed objections, contending interalia as under:
The allegation made in the complaint is partly admitted and other averment made in the complaint is denied as false.
The OP further submitted that, the complainant had approached through DIC, by his application and upon sponsoring of the person by DIC, after considering his application the OP had granted a sum of Rs.75,000=00 vide loan account no.52241011347 and IE number as 24934121 etc. The OP further submitted that, the complainant had not come up with clean hand before this forum. The complainant had suppressed the material facts. The complainant had agreed to repay the loan with interest at 12.75% per annum compounded quarterly within 60 months from the date of advance with a moratorium period of one month. But the complainant had become defaulter without repaying the agreed installments at Rs.1,700=00 per month. Hence the OP bank had issued notices, made several demands and finally filed a suit against him in O.S.No.77/2012 claiming Rs.98.749=00 with interest at 12.75% per annum compounded quarterly and with 2% over due interest. After service of summons, the complainant had appeared through his counsel on 25-5-2012, but did not contest the suit upto 31-10-2013. Hence, after the evidence of the Manager of OP bank, the suit was decreed on 6-11-2013 as prayed for and with costs a sum of Rs.10,637=00. Thus the bank has sacrificed huge amounts as on the date of repayment nearly 50% of the amount payable by the complainant. All the documents were produced as Exhibits in O.S.77/2012 where the said documents were marked as Ex.P-6 and P7 and the same has taken back by the OP bank only on 3-3-2016. The documents are ready to be returned. The complainant has appraised of the fact that, the documents are in the court records and the same were taken back from the court. The complainant has suppressed these facts. Hence there is no negligence on the part of the OP bank and there is no cause of action to file the complaint. Hence the OP prayed to dismiss the complaint with cost, in the interest of justice and equity.
5. In the course of enquiry into the complaint, the complainant and OP have filed their affidavit evidence reproducing what they have stated in their respective complaint and version. The complainant has produced documents along with the complaint which were marked as Ex-P1 to P6. The OP have produced documents which were marked as Ex-R1 to R2 and also produced 10th standard original marks card and original certificate. We have heard the arguments of both parties and perused the documents produced by both parties and posted the case for orders.
6. Based on the above materials, the following points will arise for our consideration.
- Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the OP as alleged by the complainant?
- What Order?
7. Our findings on the above points are;
Point no.1: In the affirmative
Point no.2: As per the final order below.
REASONS
8. As could be seen from the material evidence placed by both parties, it is crystal clear that, the complainant had approached the OP bank to get the facility under PMRY scheme to intended the establishment of the flour mill and availed a loan of Rs.75,000=00 vide loan account no.522741011347 from the OP bank. While granting the loan amount, the OP bank had collected the original 10th standard marks card of the complainant. It is also an admitted fact that, the loan amount was settled through one time settlement scheme in case no.123/2014-15. The complainant had paid the entire loan amount to the bank and the OP bank has issued No Objection Certificate dated 4-2-2015 as per Ex-P1.
10. The contention of the complainant is that, at the time of granting the loan amount, the OP bank had collected the original 10th standard marks card as a security purpose, but the OP bank has failed to return the original 10th standard marks card of the complainant, even after clearing the entire loan amount.
11. Per-contra, the OP bank submitted that, the original 10th standard marks card of the complainant has produced before the civil court in case O.S.No.77/2012 and it is also marked as Ex-P6 and P7. The OP bank had taken back the original documents only on 3-3-2016 from the civil court, and the same was intimated to the complainant, but the complainant had failed to collect the same from the OP bank. Further the OP has produced the above said original documents before the Hon’ble Forum and it is marked as Ex.R1 and R2.
13. Admittedly, the complainant had cleared the entire loan amount and the OP had issued the No Objection Certificate dated 4-2-2015. It is bounden duty of the OP bank to return the original documents to the complainant at the time of issuing the No Objection Certificate. But the OP did not do so, has committed negligence and deficiency of service. As it is duty of the OP bank to collect the original marks card from the civil court and return the same to the complainant. It is only after the complainant approached this forum, the OP bank woke up from the deep slumber and come up with the original marks cards stating that, they have received the original documents from the civil court only on 3-3-2016. Hence, we come to conclusion that, there is deficiency of service on the part of the OP bank. Hence we answer this point in a affirmative.
14. The complainant claimed Rs.50,000=00 towards mental agony. But the complainant has not produced any supporting documents to show that, how the loss/damages has been came to him and the complainant also not brought to the notice of this forum how the loss/damages has been caused to him, because of non-issue of original marks card. So it is difficult to award Rs.50,000=00. Hence, we decline to award the said relief as prayed for by the complainant. Of course non-issuance of original marks card, the complainant might have been suffered mental agony. Hence, we deem it just and proper to award Rs.5,000=00 to the complainant towards compensation. Apart from that, the complainant is entitled for cost of Rs.3,000=00. Accordingly, we answer this point. In the result, for the foregoing reasons, we proceed to pass the following order.
ORDER
The complaint is partly allowed.
The OP is directed to pay compensation of Rs.5,000=00 to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which, the OP shall pay the said amount to the complainant along with 12% interest per annum from the date of complaint to till the date of realization.
The OP is further directed to pay Rs.3,000=00 to the complainant towards cost of litigation.
This order is to be complied by the OP within 30 days from the date of this order.
Supply free copy of this order to both parties.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open forum on this, the 2nd day of December 2016).
LADY MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
