Kerala

Wayanad

CC/151/2013

K.A Roy, S/O Antony, Kavalakkattu (H), Sasimala P.O,Paadichira - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager,Wayanad District Co operative Bank , Pulpally Branch, Pulpally P.O - Opp.Party(s)

26 Mar 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
CIVIL STATION ,KALPETTA
WAYANAD-673122
PHONE 04936-202755
 
Complaint Case No. CC/151/2013
 
1. K.A Roy, S/O Antony, Kavalakkattu (H), Sasimala P.O,Paadichira
Sulthan Bathery Taluk
Wayanad
Kerala
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Manager,Wayanad District Co operative Bank , Pulpally Branch, Pulpally P.O
Sulthan Bathery Taluk
Wayanad
Kerala
2. Deputy Director
Coffee Board,P B No 38,Chembaka Building,Kalpetta.
Wayanad
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Jose V. Thannikode PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Renimol Mathew MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Chandran Alachery MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

By Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:

 

The Complaint as CC 147/2013 is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the Opposite parties to grant the benefits of Coffee Debt Relief pronounced by Central Government in 2010 and to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and the cost of the proceedings. The complaint as cc 151/2013 is filed directing to Opposite Parties to grant coffee Debt Relief to the complainant and to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and cost of the proceedings.

 

2. Brief of the complaint:- The Complainant in CC 147/2013 availed loan for the purpose of Coffee cultivation in the year 1999. Due to severe drought, the Complainant could not repay the loan and it became overdue. In the year 2010, the Central Government pronounced coffee Debt Relief to the growers and the Complainant is entitled to get full benefit under the scheme. As per the records of the 1st Opposite Party, the due amount of loan is Rs.12,15,810/- as on 30.06.2009. As per the Debt Relief Scheme, small farmers having below 10 Hectors of cultivation land and loan taken before 2002 and due continues up to 30.06.2009, the Central Government will bear 50% of the such dues up to 5 Lakhs, balance 25% will be born by Central banks and balance 25% will be payable by the loanee. Accordingly, the Complainant gave application to get the benefit on 2012 August to the bank for getting benefits and to restructure the loan. But the Opposite party bank never considered the application. The Complainant stated that he is entitled to get the full benefits. Hence the Complainant. The complainant in CC 151/2013 availed loan from Opposite party bank in the year 1999 for coffee cultivation. Due to drought, the Complainant could not repay the loan and it becomes due. The Central Government pronounced Coffee Debt Relief Scheme in the year 2010. As on 30.06.2009, the overdue amount becomes Rs.10,82,138/-. But the Opposite party's bank did not allow the benefit to the Complainant. Hence this complaint.

 

3. On receipt of complaint, notice were served to Opposite Parties and Opposite Parties appeared before the Forum and filed version in both cases. In the version of 1st Opposite Party, 1st Opposite party admitted the availing of loan by hypothecating land as collateral security. As per the scheme introduced by Coffee board, there are 3 categories (a) Pre-2002 loans, (b) Crop loans and post 2002 loans. The Complainant himself has included him in the post 2002 category and the coffee board had granted Rs.1,00,000/- and adjusted in his account. The Complainant again raised protest that the account is very low and he is entitled to the benefit as included with category No.1 ie pre-2002 loans . The Complainant had given an application on 18.08.2012 and it was send to 2nd Opposite Party on 25.08.2012. It is the 2nd Opposite Party to sanction the benefits. According to the 2nd Opposite Party's calculation, complainant is not eligible any more benefits than the benefits which is sanctioned before. In both cases, the contention of 1st and 2nd Opposite parties are the same.

 

4. On perusal of complaint, version and documents in both cases, the Forum raised the following points for consideration.

1. Whether there is deficiency of service from the part of 1st and 2nd Opposite
Parties?

2. Relief and cost.

 

5. Point No.1:- Joint trial ordered in both cases. The complaint in CC 147/2013 filed proof affidavit and he is examined as PW1. The Complainant in CC 147/2013 tendered evidence on behalf of Complainant in CC151/2013 also. Documents are marked as Exts.A1 to A8. 1st Opposite party filed proof affidavit and 1st Opposite Party is examined as OPW1 and Exts.B1 to B6 is marked. 2nd Opposite Party did not adduce oral evidence. On perusal of documents and records it is found that the Opposite parties admitted that the Complainants availed loan from 1st Opposite party in the year 1999. The case of 1st Opposite Party is that the loan taken in the year 1999 is closed and plantation loan is sanctioned to the Complainants in the year 2008. Opposite Parties did not produce any document to show that the loan taken in the year 1999 is re-structured and re-scheduled. Ext.B1 series is only an application to re-schedule the loan. Ext.B1 marked with objection Opposite parties did not produce original of Ext.B1 series and not proved the documents. Ext.A2 and Ext.A5 shows that the Complainant are included in Pre-2002 category. Ext.A2 is the document issued by 1st Opposite Party and Ext.A2 is the list of pre-2002 term loan taken by the Complainants. Ext.A5 document is also issued by 1st Opposite Party which is list of post -2002 loanees. In Ext.A5 list, the Complainants are not included. As per the coffee debt relief package 2010, in pre-2002 loans, waiver of 50% of the total liability subject to a maximum benefit of Rs.5,00,000/- per farmer to be borne by Government of India. An additional 25% shall be waived by the banks and balance shall be rescheduled. The balance 25% will be paid by the Complainants. As per clause 5 of the package the banks shall first give benefit of the waiver to the accounts of the growers and claim the share from the coffee board. On perusal of documents, and evidence, the Forum found that the complainants are coming under the category of pre-2002 loan and they are entitled to get the full benefit as per the coffee debt relief package 2010. By not allowing the full benefit to the Complainants resulted deficiency of service from the part of Opposite parties. Point No.1 is found accordingly.

 

 

6. Point No.2:- Since there is deficiency of service from the part of Opposite parties, the Opposite parties are liable to pay cost and compensation to the Complainants.

 

In the result, the complaints is partly allowed and the 1st Opposite Party is directed to give waiver of 50% of the coffee board's waiver and 25% of 1st Opposite party's waiver in the account of the Complainant ie waiver of 75% of the total due amount of the Complainants loan account after deducting already given waiver in their accounts. The Complaints are directed to pay 25% of total due amounts in their loan accounts to 1st Opposite Party. After giving 75% waiver, the 1st Opposite Party can reimburse the share of 2nd Opposite Party ie 50% of the total due amount from 2nd Opposite Party. 1st and 2nd Opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only as compensation and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only as cost of the proceedings each to both Complainants.

 

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 26th day of March 2015.

 

Date of Filing:16.08.2013.

 

PRESIDENT : Sd/-

 

MEMBER : Sd/-

/True copy/

 

 

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

 

APPENDIX.

 

Witness for the complainants:

 

PW1. Jose K.A. Complainant (CC No.147/2013)

 

 

Witness for the Opposite Parties:

 

OPW1. Thankamma Antony Branch Manager, District Co-operative

Bank, Pulpally Branch.

 

 

Exhibits for the complainants:

 

A1. Copy of Letter. dt:14.06.2010.

A2. Proforma to claim government share of coffee

debt relief liability for pre-2002 term loans (SCTL). dt:18.08.2012.

A3(a). Letter dt:10.12.1999.

A3(b) Letter. dt:12.01.2001.

A4. Letter. dt:25.09.2008.

A5. Proforma to claimgovernment share of coffee debt relief

liability for post 2002 term loans (SCTL). dt:18.08.2012.

A6. Letter.

A7. Final Notice. dt:05.05.2014.

A8. Copy of Letter. dt:14.08.2013.

 

Exhibits for the opposite Parties.

 

B1 series Copy of Application for Medium Term Schematic loan for (13 pages) Rejuvanation/maintaining plantation.

B2. Copy of Application for Medium Term Schematic loan for Rejuvanation/maintaining plantation. dt:10.03.2003.

B3(a) Copy of Receipt. dt:15.03.2003.

B3(b) Copy of Receipt. dt:15.03.2003.

B3(c) Copy of Receipt. dt:27.02.2003.

B3(d) Copy of Receipt. dt:27.02.2003.

B4 (a) Copy of Letter. dt:22.03.2003.

B4(b) Copy of Receipt. dt:27.02.2003.

B4(c) Copy of Letter. dt:14.08.2003.

B4(d) Copy of Letter. dt:23.08.2013.

B4(e) Copy of Letter.

B5(a) Copy of Certificate of Encumbrance on Property.

B5(b) Copy of Certificate of Encumbrance on Property.

B5(c) Copy of Land details.

B6(1) Copy of Letter. dt:30.11.2007.

B6(2) Copy of Acknowledgement.

B6(3) Copy of Letter. dt:30.11.2007.

B6(4) Copy of Acknowledgement

B6(5) Copy of Letter. dt:22.06.2007.

B6(6) Copy of Letter. dt:22.06.2007.

B6(7) Loan Ledger.

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Jose V. Thannikode]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Renimol Mathew]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. Chandran Alachery]
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.