IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLLAM

DATED THIS THE 25^TH  DAY OF MARCH 2013

Present:          Smt. G.Vasanthakumari, President

Adv. Ravisusha, Member

CC .NO.182/2010

Filed dtd on 09/09/2010

Order dtd on 25/03/2013

Vijayan. B                                                       :           Complainant

Kesava Vilasam

Chirakkara Thazham

Kollam

[By Adv. K. Radhamani, Kollam]

V/S

1.      The Managing Director                 :           Opposite parties

The Muthoot Finance Private Ltd

The Muthoot Regional Office

Eranakulam

Kochi-18

2.      The Mananger

The Muthoot Finance Private Ltd

Paripally Branch

Paripally

Kollam

[By Adv.Sooranad Varghese, Kollam]

ORDER

ADV.RAVISUSHA, MEMBER.

            Complainant case is that

                        The complainant is an account holder and consumer of the opposite parties who pledged his gold ornaments with the second opposite parties on 18/03/08 vide loan No: 9008 weighing 11 gms and availed a loan of Rs.10, 800/- (Rupees Ten Thousand and Eight Hundred only) and he also pledged his gold ornaments weighing 41.800gms for an amount of Rs.40, 000/-(Rupee Forty Thousand only) with the second opposite party on 06/11/08 vide loan No.12352.

At the time of availing the loan, the second opposite party made the complainant to believe that he would pay interest at the rate of 8% per annum and hence the complainant remitted monthly interest as specified above without any default upto 14/06/2010, for which the second opposite party did not give any receipts, since it was only interest to the loan amount.

            On 14/06/10, itself the complainant was ready and willing to release his pledge items by remitting the entire loan amount from the second opposite party and hence he demanded him to release his pledge gold items. Then the second opposite party made him believe that all the gold items pledged in the Branch would daily be collected by the 1^st opposite party through his agents and the same would be kept in his safe custody since theft was a daily phenomenon in the locality. Moreover, the second party directed the complainant to produce a written submission and the same would be forwarded to the first opposite party with in no time. Hence the complainant submitted a written petition on the same day itself and thereby he was directed to come after two weeks with ready cash for releasing the gold items. Hence he approached the second opposite party on 30/06/10 with ready cash for releasing his gold items. Then the second opposite party told the complainant that it would take time for releasing the gold items since it was in the custody of the first opposite party. Since the gold items have a special sanctity to the complainant, he regularly contacted the second opposite party for releasing his gold items and finally on 19/07/10. But the second opposite party in collusion with the first opposite party evaded himself from his legal duty of releasing the gold items. Hence filed this complaint.

OPPOSITE PARTIES FILED VERSION CONTENDING THAT:-

            The complainant did not remit any amount as interest in his loan accounts even after notice were sent. So such statements regarding remittance of interest is utter false and denied by the opposite party. Above all the complainant had done several other

transactions with the same branch. He had pledged gold on 18/01/2007 and released on 22/01/2007, 13/02/2007 released on 15/02/2007, 26/06/2007 and released on 30/06/2007

and so the complainant is well aware of the procedure of renewal, the interest rate, if any remittance of interest. No customer will quit the counter without receiving the remittance and renewal slip, if any remittance is made.

            There is no deficiency in service from the side of opposite parties. The allegations in paragraph number 4 of the complaint are false and fabricated by the complainant. It the complainant was with bonofide he could approach the branch when ever he received the reminders and notices from the 2^nd opposite party. The complainant was well aware that, the amount of loan remind without payments of interest and renewal and when the opposite parties are at liberty to proceed against the consumer by auction of the items pledged. This is settled law.

            The opposite parties are legally entitled to realize the loan amount with interest, penal interest and cost by auction and done action on 23/06/2010 for loan account number 12352 and at the time of auction the total dues with respect to this account was Rs.62,900/- and the amount received from auction was only Rs.57,000/- ie there was a short fall of Rs.5,900/- which the complainant is liable to pay to the opposite party and auction for the loan account number 69008 was done on 14/10/2009 and at that time the dues was Rs. 16823/- and the amount received from auction was only Rs.14,040/- ie there was no short fall of Rs.2783.

            The complainant was in receipt of reminders from the opposite parties. Also the complainant received letter by under Certificate of Posting from the 2^nd opposite party. Finally registered letters were received by the complainant before auction 28/04/2009 and 01/03/2010. But the complainant did not respond to close the loan accounts. The opposite parties are not liable for the inaction from the side of the complainant.

At the time of pledging the ornaments a signature is obtained in a loan folio, which bears the jewel loan number, the items of pledged jewels, the amount advanced, the date of pledge and the undertaking signature obtained from the consumer shows that the conditions are accepted by the customers. As such the present complainant has accepted the conditions enumerated in the pledge form. More over the company is non Banking Financial company functioning as per the guidelines of RBI and as per the master circular issued by the RBI the company has the right to fix the rate of interest and the only condition is that the customer is made to know the rate of interest charged which was done in this case also.

For the above reasons and pleadings the opposite parties pray to dismiss the complaint with the cost of the opposite parties.

The complainant filed affidavit.PW1 was examined. Exhibit P1 to P3 were marked. Opposite party filed vakalath and examined as DW1.Exhibit D1 to D6 series were marked.

Heard both sides

The points that would arise for consideration are

(1)   Whether the complaint is maintainable in the Forum?

(2)   Whether there is any deficiency in service from the part of opposite party?

(3)   Compensation and cost?

POINT.1

The opposite party contended that the complaint is not maintainable in the Forum because the complainant pledged old gold ornaments in the year 2008 March and June. The petition filed in the year 2010 September after two years. Here on perusal of Exhibit P1 and P2 is seen that the gold ornaments were pledged on 18/03/2008 and 06/11/2008. With regard to pledge date 06/11/2008 there is no limitation. With regard to pledge date 18/03/2008 there is limitation. But both the parties admit that both of them are bound to comply the terms and conditions in Exhibit P1 and P. In condition number 1 in Exhibit P2

it is stated that ‘Hcp hÀjw Imemh[n IgnR hmbv]bn³ taepff ]enibpw,

dnkvIv interest \p Iq«p]eni CuSm¡p¶XmWv’.The said condition shows that the opposite party gas given 1 year legal time to the customer for taking the gold ornaments. On considering condition number 1 in exhibit P1 and P2 there is no limitation for filing this complaint.

The point found accordingly  

POINT 2 AND 3

               Admittedly the complainant had pledged 11 gm of gold ornaments with the 2^nd opposite party on 18/03/2008 and availed an amount of Rs.10,800/-and also pledged 41.800 gms for an amount of Rs.40,000/-. There was an agreement between the parties’ regarding the interest and repayment of the loan amount.

               According to the complainant the interest rate is 8% per annum. But according to the opposite party, the complainant had to pay 17% interest and risk interest. Risk interest is depending upon different scheme chosen by the borrower. The company will grand some rebate for early repayment for its customers.

               According to the complainant he has remitted monthly interest without any default upto2010.But no receipts were produced before the Forum. The main allegation of the complainant is that when the complainant approached the opposite parties for taking his pledged items by remitting the entire loan amount, the opposite parties evaded from releasing the gold items with lame excuses and also the opposite parties auctioned the pledged items without giving notice to the complainant. Opposite parties contended that the complainant did not remit any amount as interest in his loan amount and all reasonable notice were sent but the complainant not responded.

Opposite parties also contended that they have sent remind letters to the complainant and finally registered letters were received by the complainant before auction. Opposite parties produced Exhibit D3 series to D6 to prove their above contention. There is no dispute that the complainant had done several other transactions with the same branch. Exhibit D3 series is the postal receipt 2 in numbers. But it does not specify to which transaction that the postal receipt indicates. More over there is no demand letter produced by the opposite party is support of Exhibit D3 series. Exhibit D4 series is the receipt of under certificate of posting. That also does not specify the category of transaction. Exhibit D5 is the letter from postal authorities. The postal authorities were not examined to prove the authenticity of ExtD5 . Ext.D6 series are the letters under Ordinary post. According to complainant Ext D6 series are bundle of letters kept with the opposite party band and the same are fraudulently filed. Opposite party failed to prove Ext D6 series that those were exactly sent to the complainant. According to the complainant the auction with respect to the pledge ornaments done by the opposite parties are illegal. Here from the evidence of Dw1 it is revealed that DW1 is not at all aware of the auction proceedings conducted by the opposite parties. She does not know any thing about the procedure and the participants of the procedure. DW1 specifically admits that no demand letter is issued to the complainant before the auction procedure. From the above evidence we are also of the view that the auction of the complainant’s pledged items done by the opposite party is illegal.

The opposite parties are bound to give proper notice to the complainant before the auction sale of the pledged items. DW1 in her deposition admits that no notice was served to the complainant in respect of the sale procedure. The complainant had pledged the gold ornaments for availing a loan and was ready to pay back the principal amount and interest.

It is also noted that the opposite parties had not returned the ornaments though the complainant was ready to remit the principal amount with interest. On considering the entire evidence we are of the view that there is gross negligence on the part of opposite parties. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Opposite parties are directed to release the gold ornaments to the complainant on payment of principal

amount with 18% interest. If the opposite parties are unable to return the gold ornaments to the complainant, they are directed to pay the value of the gold ornaments of the current market rate to the complainant on payment of principal amount with 18% interest. Opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.5000/-as compensation and Rs.2500/- as cost to the proceedings. The order is to be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.

Dated this the 25^th  day of March 2013

G.VASANTHAKUMARI:Sd/-

ADV.RAVISUSHA:Sd/-

Forwarded/by Order

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT

I N D EX

1. List of witness for the complainant

              PW.1 :- Vijayan. B

2. List of Documents  for the complainant

Exbt.P1:- Muthoot Finance Pledge receipt

Exbt.P2:- Muthoot Finance Receipt

Exbt.P3:-Letter

3. List of witness for the opposite party

DW1: Anitha

       4.  List of documents for the opposite party

Exbt.D1:-Muthoot Finance Receipt

Exbt.D2:- Muthoot Finance Receipt dated on 06/11/2008

Exbt.D3:- Postal receipt

Exbt.D4:-Certificate of posting dated 23/04/2010

Exbt.D5-Postal acknowledgement

Exbt.D6-Muthoot Finace Notice