1
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLLAM
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MAY 2013
C.C.NO.222/2011
Ashok Kumar : Complainant
Sarojini Sadanam (RS Land)
Nedungolam P.O
Kollam
[By Adv.D.Usha Kumari, Kollam]
V/S
The Secretary : Opposite party
Poothakulam Service Co-Operative
Bank Ltd.No.2944
Poothakulam
By Adv. K.Ramachandran Nair, Kollam
ORDER
SMT. G.VASANTHAKUMARI, PRESIDENT
Complainants case is that he had availed a loan from the opposite party bearing No.281/ 07-06(106/80) for a sum of Rs.5 Lakhs by mortgaging his property on 13/09/2005, that at the time of availing the said loan it was mutually agreed that the complainant would pay the entire amount along with 12percent interest within 5 years and accordingly the complainant was remitting the instalments to the opposite party, while so the complainant met with some medical problems and suffered a stroke and as a result one side of his body became paralysed and it took 2½ years for recovery, that thereafter he received a notice form the opposite party to pay a huge amount as the arrears of the said loan, that as the complainant received the letter he approached the opposite party to verify his loan account and his remittance, but the opposite party did not incline to verify the accounts and also the opposite party threatened the complainant that he will initiate cohesive steps against the complainant, that on 22/01/2011 again the complainant received an intimation from the opposite party to participate in the Adalath conducted by the opposite party and avail the one time settlement facility, that then the complainant
demanded for a statement of account showing rate of interest charged and amount remitted etc but the opposite party is not amenable to furnish the same and hence this complaint to direct the opposite party to furnish the correct statement of account stating the correct amount of loan taken, the rate of interest agreed, the rate of interest charging, the penal interest charging, the amount remitted till date in the loan account, and the other charges if any and to permit the complainant to realize a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation from the opposite party.
Opposite party filed version contending that the complaint is not maintainable either on law or on facts and it is liable to be dismissed with the cost of the opposite party, that the complainant having no locus-standi to file this type of complaint before this Forum and this Forum having no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint, that the complainant availed a loan of Rs.5,00,000/- (Five Lakhs) from the opposite party on 13/09/2005 by mortgaging 12.89 ares of property in Block No.32, resurvey Nos.400/12-4, 400/5-2 and 352/12 of Paravoor Village for a term of 36 months at 14.5 PERCENT interest, that one Sarojini, Poikayil Puthen Veedu, Vadakkemukku, Nedungolam stood as surety to the above loan.[MTNA 281/05-06], that after availing the loan the complainant never cared to repay any amount to the opposite party except amount paid on 28/03/11 and 25/05/11, that the opposite party send several notices to the complainant through registered post, but the complainant never responded to the notices, that the opposite party had filed suit before the Arbitrator for realizing the amount due from the complainant and an award was passed by the Arbitrator for an amount of Rs.8,61,707, that after that the opposite party had filed execution petition for the recovery of the award amount vide EP NO.2062/10 and it is still pending and now the complainant is trying to delay the execution proceedings by way of this kind of complaints, that the complainant had never approached the opposite party for a statement of accounts of his loan account, that it is a policy of the opposite party to furnish statement of account to its members as and when demanded by its members, that here in this case the complainant never demanded for the statement of account of his loan account, that the opposite party is ready and willing to furnish the same to complainant if he demands it and the complaint is to be dismissed with costs.
3
The 1st and formost contention raised by the opposite party is that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The alleged reason is two fold, (1) Against the complainant Arbitration Award passed and pending in execution and hence this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this matter.
(2)Not demanded for statement of accounts as and when demand opposite party is ready to give copy of statement of accounts. So a preliminary issue raised in this regard ie, whether the complaint is maintainable? and heard both sides.
For the purpose of answering this issue marked Exbts P1 to P3 and D1 and D2.
The Issue:- Admittedly the complainant has availed a loan of Rs.5 Lakhs from the opposite party on 13/9/2005 by mortgaging 12.89 ares of property in Block No.32, resurvey Nos.400/12-4, 400/5-2 and 352/12 of Paravoor Village for a term of 36 months at 14.5 percent interest for his business purpose. Ext.D1 ‘Gd-S-hpv ’ would substantiate the same. It further substantiates that in this respect Arbitration award passed for Rs.
8, 61,707/- on 26/3/2010. According to opposite party EP.No.2062/10 is pending for execution and in order to defeat the same this complaint. It follows that he has filed this case suppressing material facts. It is well settled that after passing of Arbitration award, Forums have no jurisdiction to entertain such matters. So also there is no scrap of paper to show that copy of statement of accounts demanded and not given. Hence we have no hesitation to safely conclude that the complaint is not maintainable.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed as not maintainable. No order as to costs.
Dated this the 13th day of May 2013
G.VASANTHAKUMARI:Sd/-
ADV.RAVISUSHA:Sd/-
Forwarded/ by Order
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
