Orissa

Cuttak

CC/77/2022

Sumitra Sasmal - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Managing Director,IIFL Finance Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Self

20 Oct 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                            C.C.No.77/2022

 

Mrs.SumitraSasmal,

W/O:BanamaliParida,Dagarpada,Gopalasahi,

P.S:Lalbag,PO:Chandinichowk,Dist:Cuttack.            ... Complainant.

 

                                                Vrs.

1.        The Managing Director,

IIFL Finance Ltd.,SunInfotech Park,

Road No.16V,Plot No.B-23,Thane,

Thane Industrial Area,Wagle Estate,Thane-400604.

 

2.        The Branch Manager,     

IIFL Finance Ltd.,SunInfotech Park

Dagarpada,Chandinichowk,Cuttack,

Pin-753002, Branch Name-Cuttack,Satichowra GL.

 

3.        The CEO(Chief Executive Officer),

IIFL Finance Ltd., Corporate Office 802,8^th Floor,

Hub Town Solaris,N.SPhakaMargVijayanagar,

Andheri East,Mumbai-400069.                                              ... Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:               Sri DebasishNayak,President.

                                Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    25.04.2022

Date of Order:   20.10.2022

 

For the complainant:          Self.

For the O.Ps  :Mr.A.K.Chaudhury,Adv. & Associates.

 

Sri DebasishNayak,President.                                                   

            Case of the complainant bereft unnecessary details as made out from the complaint petition in short is that the complainant had mortgaged her gold ornaments with the O.Ps and had taken loan of Rs.1,41,800/- with interest thereon @ 21% per annum alongwith additional interest @ 6% per annum.  As per the agreement, the complainant had paid 3 instalments to the O.Ps in time andthus had paid a sum of Rs.9400/- top them.   Due to the pandemic Covid-19 situation and financial crisis, the complainant became defaulter in paying the instalments as due from her to the O.Ps for which the O.Ps with malafide intention had sold all her gold ornaments without even serving any notice to her for which the complainant had to file this case before this Commission seeking cost of her gold ornaments to the tune of Rs.2,70,000/- alongwith cost of her litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/-.  She had further claimed a sum of Rs.,1,00,000/- towards her mental agony and harassment from the O.Ps..  Thus the complainant in total has claimed a sum of Rs.3,80,000/- from the O.Ps and has further prayed for any other reliefs as deemed fit and proper.

            She has filed copies of documents in order to prove her case alongwith her complaint petition.

2.         The O.Ps have contested this case and have filed their written version together.  As per the written version of the O.Ps, the case of the complainant is not maintainable, there was no deficiency in service and that they had prayed for dismissal of the complaint petition being not maintainable.  The O.Ps have admitted about the loan as given by them to the complainant of this case by loan agreement no.GL15201702 for a tenure of 11 months @ 21% per annum payable on 18^th of every month, but according to them, the complainant had paid only a sum of Rs.5000/- and thereafter a sum of Rs.2000/- on 4.2.21 and 12.2.21 respectively. But the monthly instalment was of Rs.2482/- and if paid bi-monthly it was of Rs.4964/-.  When the complainant had not paid the E.M.Is as per due time, she had violated the terms and conditions as stipulated in the loan agreement for which an additional interest @ 6% was levied by them upon the loan amount.  Thus, the O.Ps ultimately had issued a Pre-Sale notice on 1.1.21 to the complainant on her given address and thereafter had sold the gold ornaments as mortgaged by the complainant, by way of auction in order to recover the loan amount.  According to the O.Ps when the borrower defaulted thereby violating the terms and conditions of the loan agreement; in order to recover the outstanding loan amount, they had also made paper publications on 18.6.21 in the Oriya daily newspaper “Suryaprava” and also in the English daily newspaper “Business Standard”.  Thus, according to the O.Ps, the complainant has suppressed the material facts, has not approached with clean hands and there was no deficiency of service or practice of any unfair trade by them for which they have prayed for dismissal of the complaint petition with exemplary cost.

            The O.Ps have filed copies of documents in order to prove their case.

3.         Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of the written version, this Commission is of a view to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a proper conclusion.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable ?

            ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of theO.Ps ?

            iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed ?

Issue no.ii.

            Out of the three issues, issue no.ii being the pertinent one taken up first for consideration here in this case.

            Admittedly, the complainant had availed a gold loan by mortgaging some of her gold ornaments with the O.Ps and had executed the loan agreement accordingly.  It is also admitted fact that the complainant after paying certain amount towards the loan as taken by her, became defaulter subsequently.  She has averred that the O.Ps had not allowed her the moratorium period as per the guidelines of the R.B.I.  The O.Ps on the other hand, had issued Pre-Sale notice to the complainant on 1.1.21, when she became a defaulter.  The plea of the complainant is that she has not received the said notice dt.1.1.21 as alleged to have been sent to her by the O.Ps.  In order to attract deficiency if any, the complainant should establish the latches on the part of the O.Ps and the malafide intention thereto.  She admits to have executed the loan agreement with the O.Ps which goes to show that she is bound by the terms and conditions of such loan agreement as executed in between herself and the O.Ps.  The contention of the complainant that the O.Ps had not provided her moratorium period as per the guidelines of RBI, is not supported with any documentary evidence and correspondence thereto in that aspect with the O.Ps.  Rather, on scrutiny of the copies of documents as filed by the O.Ps of this case, it is noticed that infact a letter was sent to the complainant by the O.Ps on the address as provided by her but the same was returned to the sender being not served.  On perusal of the annexures- A series as annexed alongwith pleader’s notice sent to the complainant, it is noticed that there was infact paper publications in one Oriya daily and in one English daily newspapers.  After perusing the documents as available, it is noticed that in this case the complainant after becoming a defaulter had made no correspondence with the O.Ps but had only issued a pleader’s notice and thereafter had filed this case.With heavy heart this Commission comes to a conclusion that it can never be said to be maintainable and thus she is not entitled to any of the reliefs as claimed by her in this case.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                                            ORDER

            The case is dismissed on contest against O.Ps and as regards to the facts and circumstances of the case without any cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 20^th day of   October,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.     

                                                                                                                                Sri DebasishNayak

                                                                                                                                            President

                       

                                                                                                                                                                Sri SibanandaMohanty

                                                                                                                                               Member