The President,Kollurvila Service Co-Ope. Bank Ltd. V/S Saifunnisa,Puthukalil Veedu
Saifunnisa,Puthukalil Veedu filed a consumer case on 29 Jul 2008 against The President,Kollurvila Service Co-Ope. Bank Ltd. in the Kollam Consumer Court. The case no is CC/05/295 and the judgment uploaded on 30 Nov -0001.
Kerala
Kollam
CC/05/295
Saifunnisa,Puthukalil Veedu - Complainant(s)
Versus
The President,Kollurvila Service Co-Ope. Bank Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)
Kallada K.G.Raveendran
29 Jul 2008
ORDER
C.D.R.F. KOLLAM : CIVIL STATION - 691013 CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::: KOLLAM consumer case(CC) No. CC/05/295
Saifunnisa,Puthukalil Veedu
...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
The President,Kollurvila Service Co-Ope. Bank Ltd. The Secretary,Kollurvila Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Q 214, Pallimukku
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
1. K. VIJAYAKUMARAN : President 2. RAVI SUSHA : Member 3. VIJYAKUMAR. R : Member
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
By R. VIJAYAKUMAR, MEMBER. The complaint is filed for getting refund of excess amount collected by opposite parties along with interest at the rate of 12% and compensation and cost. The avernments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows. The complainant availed a loan for Rs.25,000/- on 18/12/1995 and defaulted in repayment. As agreed to settle the accounts as per the one-time settlement scheme opposite parties informed the Complainant to remit Rs.53,962/-including interest Rs. 28,962/-. Opposite parties had collected additional amount Rs.600/- as case charge and Rs.100/- as notice charge Complainant remitted the amount on 20/11/02 and received receipt holding No. 12146. The interest calculated by the opposite parties is excess that the rate fixed by the Registrar of Co-Operative Societies. Complainant made complaints to the opposite parties several times but no steps were taken by the opposite parties. Circular No. 51/03 issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies on 30/8/03 directed the primary co-operative societies to collect 12% interest to the amount due on 31-03-2001. There was a specific direction in that circular to refund the excess amount already collected from the loanees who were already settled the loan amount as per one time settlement prior to that circular. Even though the Complainant is entitled to get an amount of Rs.8,925/- , opposite parties refunded only Rs.3,881/- Complainant made a representation to the Reg: (General) of Co-operative societies through her Advocate and the Registrar issued a direction by No. M/581/05 dated 14/3/05. That direction was not complied with Complainant again sent an Adv. Notice to the opposite parties but it was not responded. Hence the complaint. The opposite parties filed version contenting inter alia that the complaint is not maintainable. The complainant defaulted in repayment and Arbitration was filed by the opposite parties. On 21/11/02 the Complainant closed the loan remitting Rs.54,662/- including interest , Notice chargers and Case charges. The Complainant had not applied to close the loan under one time settlement scheme. After a long period of closure of the loan on 20/10/03 only the Complainant applied to opposite parties stating that the interest amount of the loan should be recalculated under one time settlement scheme and the excess amount remitted by the Complainant should be refunded. The Complainant is not eligible to get the benefit of under circular No. 51/03 dated 30/8/03 by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The circular was not in effect at the time of closure of the loan. The circular directed to grant benefit only to the loanees who were settled their loan under direction of circular No. 35/03 dated 1/7/03 and closed loan between 1/4/03 and 1/7/03. As per directions of from Assistant Registrar Office opposite party repaid Rs. 3,881/- to the complainant. The statement that the Complainant is entitled to get Rs. 8,925/- is not true and hence denied. The points that would araise for consideration are. 1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. 2. Compensation and cost. The Complainant filed affidavit. She was examined as PW1. Exhibits PW1 to P6 were marked. The II opposite party was examined as DW1. Exhibit D1 was marked. Both sides were heard. Admittedly a loan for Rs. 25,000/- was availed by the Complainant and it was closed on 20/11/02. The main contention of opposite parties is that the benefits under circular No. 54/03 are not applicable for the Complainants loan. It was intended only for two categories of loanees. 1. Those who were closed their loan as per circular No. 35/2003 and 2. Those who were closed their loan between the period of 1/4/03 and 1/7/03. The Complainant is not applied for the benefits of one time settlement scheme. The Complainant was a defaulter and Arbitration steps were taken against the complainant. The Complainant is eligible to get the benefits of one time settlement scheme implemented by the co-operative department for the loanees. The opposite parties are duty bond to grant the benefit under one time settlement scheme with out raising technicalities. The opposite parties were trying to misinterpret the circular issued by the Registrar of co-operative societies. As per circular No. 42.2002 dated 2/11/02, the period of settlement of complainants loan was an extended period of one time settlement scheme. It is clear that circular No. 54/03 is intended to grant benefit with retrospective effect. The benefit extended to those who were closed the loan as per loan agreement within the stipulated time. The interest of the loans of those loanees were to be recalculated and excess amount extracted should be refunded. The reluctance of opposite parties to refund the excess interest collected from the complainant is a deficiency in service. Hence the complaint is allowed. The opposite parties are directed to recalculate the interest at the rate of 12% and refund the excess amount to the Complainant along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. The opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as compensation and cost. The order is to be complied with within one month of the date of receipt of this order. Dated this the 29th day of July, 2008 INDEX List of witness for the complaint PW1 Saifuneesa List of documents for the complaint. Ext: P1 Circular No. 51/2003- Making objected, Marked subject to admissibility Ext: P2 Notice dated14.3.2005 Ext: P3 Copy of Advocate Notice 26.4.2005 Ext: P4 Advocate notice dated. 2.3.2005 List of witness for the Opposite party DW1 Mable Steapher Ext: D1 Loan Ledge Copy . .
......................K. VIJAYAKUMARAN : President ......................RAVI SUSHA : Member ......................VIJYAKUMAR. R : Member
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.