Sri Debedra Debata. filed a consumer case on 04 Nov 2022 against The Manager,ICICI,Bank,Jajpur Town Branch . in the Jajapur Consumer Court. The case no is CC/32/2021 and the judgment uploaded on 15 Nov 2022.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : JAJPUR.
Presents:- 1. Smt. Susmita Mishra President,
Dated the 4th day of November 2022.
C.C. No. 32 / 2021..
Debendra Debata,
S/o:- Upendra Debata,
Vill:- Biruhan, Po:- Nahapada,
P.S:- Mangalpur, Dist:- Jajpur. . . . . Complainant.
Versus.
Jajpur Town Branch, Jajpur,
At:- Habeli Bazar, Po/PS/Dist:- Jajpur.
I.C.I.C.I. Bank Towers, Bandra-Kurla Complex,
Mumbai – 400051. ....Opp. Parties.
Counsels appeared for the parties.
For the Complainant :- Sachidananda Rana, Advocate & Associates,
For the Opp. Parties :- Nalinikanta Dash, Advocate & Associates.
Date of filing Complaint :- 08.03.2021.
Date of Argument :- 28.10.2022
Date of Order :- 04.11.2022.
J U D G M E N T.
MR. BIBEKANANDA DAS, MEMBER (I/c) :-
The present C.C. No. 32 of 2018 is taken up today for order. This case was filed on 08.03.2021 by the complainant for the illegal and arbitrary action of the O.Ps which cause irreparable loss to the complainant. Perused the materials available on record and heard the case from the learned counsels of both the parties.
Brief fact:-
The brief facts of the case is that due lto urgent need of money the complainant had taken a gold mortgage loan of Rs. 13,462:40 (Rupees thirteen thousand four hundred sixty two and forty paise) only from the ICICI Bank, Jajpur Town Branch (O.P. No.1) after mortgaging his gold ornaments on dt. 07.01.2015. But after payment of two installments of loan amount i.e. Rs. 2,447/- & Rs. 1,660/- respectively, the complainant failed to pay the rest installment amount due to his poverty. That on dt.04.01.2020 when the complainant went to the ICICI Bank, Jajpur Town Branch for repayment of all this loan amounts with interest so as to get back all his gold ornaments which has given to the bank as mortgage of the time of sanctioning loan amount. But the bank authority did not receive the grievance of the complainant and mislead the complainant and finally he came to know that the O.P. No.1 has auctioned his gold ornaments without any information and notice. Thereafter the complainant sent advocate notice to the O.P.-Bank and O.P.–Bank not responded to such notice. So, finding no alternative the complainant knocked the door of this Commission for redressal of his grievances.
After receipt of notice the O.Ps appeared through their Advocate and filed written version stating therein that the complainant had availed loan from O.P.-Bank against pledge of gold on dt. 07.01.2015. The pledged ornaments were valued of Rs. 13,462:40 paisa and against pledged ornaments the loan of Rs. 13,400/- was sanctioned and disbursed to the complainant. The gold loan was supposed to be renewed or closed on dt. 07.01.2016. Accordingly, the gold loan was renewed on 08.01.2016 and on dt. 09.01.2017. The complainant was supposed to close or renew the said facility on or before 09.01.2018.
Further it is submitted by the learned counsel for the O.P.-Bank that the complainant failed to discharge his liability and remain idle about the loan. Since the gold loan was neither renewed or closed, a demand notice dt. 20.01.2018 was issued to the complainant for making payment of the outstanding amount. But the complainant not responded for which the O.P.-Bank vide its letter dt. 22.03.2018 issued a loan recall notice demanding the entire outstanding dues in respect of complainant’s loan account, to which the complainant did not respond and finally in order to recover the outstanding dues the O.P.-Bank proceeded for enforcement of security notice dt. 14.07.2018 and did proper publications of the auction notice on dt. 28.07.2018 in two leading newspapers. Since all the correspondences made by the O.P.-Bank remained futile to draw any response of the complainant, the O.P.-Bank auctioned the gold ornaments on dt. 08.08.2018 for an amount of Rs. 19,319/- against an outstanding of Rs. 15,231/-. The said amount was more than the outstanding dues, the complainant was issued a letter dt. 18.07.2019 calling upon to collect the surplus amount on production of required documents which was also not responded by the complainant.
It is pleaded by the O.P.-Bank that it has taken all due diligence, care & caution before proceeding to auction the gold ornaments. But in view of the foregoing submission it is the complainant who has shown its reluctance in responding the O.P.-Bank’s call to redeem his gold ornaments and further submitted that the complainant has approached this Hon’ble Commission with frivolous allegations and as such the complaint required dismissal.
Issues :-
Issue No. 1:- It is undisputed fact that the complainant availed the loan of Rs. 13,462:40 paisa from the O.P.-Bank by mortgaging his gold ornaments. As against such loan the complainant has paid interest which over in the express of service and the interest so paid by the complainant in repayment of loan is consideration and as such the complainant is a consumer as per observation of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 1995(11) Sec.150 (Consumer Unit & Trust Society Vrs. Chairman & M.D. Bank of Baroda) 2001(1) CPR-7-SC.
Issue No. 2:- It is our considered view that the O.P.-Bank itself has taken the stand in the written version that it has issue a letter dt. 18.07.2019 calling upon the complainant to collect the surplus amount as production of required documents which was not responded by the complainant. On the other hand the complainant has filed this consumer complaint before this Commission on dt. 08.03.2021 which is well within the prescribed period of limitation as per C.P. Act, 2019.
Issue No. 3 & 4:-
It is alleged by the complainant that without giving any opportunity or notice, the O.P.-Bank auctioned gold ornaments and also alleged that the O.P.-Bank has failed to supply the details endorsement of postal receipt. The complainant also alleged that the O.P.-Bank has taken the plea in the written version that it has published in two newspaper regarding the auction sale which is false and alleged that such newspapers are not available in the complainant’s area at Jajpur. The O.Ps without maintaining proper procedure of law whimsically, arbitrarily, illegally without information has auctioned the gold ornament for which the complainant sustained irreparable loss and undergone mental agony and harassment. The complainant’s family members also sustained the same. On the other hand, the O.Ps taken the stand that they have followed all the formalities before public auction of the said gold ornaments of the complainant. That though the o.ps have argued that, they have sent many letters on different dates to the complainant but have not filed any evidence that such letters were duly served upon the complainant. The O.Ps have also not filed any documents to prove that the date of auction of gold ornaments of the complainant has been duly intimated to the complainant as per observation of the Hon’ble National Commission & Odisha State Commission reported in 2002 (3) CPR-34-NC, 2004 (3) CPR-154-Odisha. The O.Ps are also required to file the relevant document indicating the other bidders who have participated in the auction sale. That apart the O.Ps have not filed any cogent documentary evidence to prove that the gold ornaments of the complainant has been valued by a approved valuer.
Further the O.Ps submitted that the auction of the gold ornaments was held on dt. 08.08.2018 for Rs. 19,319/- against the outstanding amount of Rs. 15,231/- where as the O.P.-Bank taken the stand that they have informed the complainant to collect the surplus amount on dt. 18.07.2019. Here was failed to understand under what circumstances the O.Ps waiting for one year to inform the complainant for collection of surplus amount.
From the above observation, we are of the opinion that the O.Ps have committed deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice by auctioning the gold ornaments weighing 69 gm 170 mg of the complainant and the O.Ps have not followed the proper procedure of law for auction sale. In the conclusion the interest of justice would be best served in case we allow the present complaint.
O R D E R.
Taking into all the facts and laws involved the O.Ps are directed to pay the present market price of the auctioned gold ornaments to the complainant (Cost of the gold ornaments) alongwith Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only for mental agony and harassment undergone by the complainant, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to file execution proceeding before this Commission. Further complainant is directed to clear all his outstanding dues till the date of auction (Upto 08.08.2018) in respect of the gold loan account and pay the same to the O.P.-Bank within one month from the date of receipt of this order. The complaint is allowed on contest.
Issue extract of the order to the parties for compliance.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 4th day of November 2022.
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.