BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI Dated this the 31st day of December, 2008
Present: SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER C.C No.24/2008 Between Complainant : Aleyamma W/o Thomas, Vithayathil House, Kanjiramattom P.O, Thodupuzha, Idukki District. And Opposite Parties : 1. The Secretary, Urban Co-operative Bank, Thodupuzha P.O, Thodupuzha. (By Advs:M.K.Kunjachan & K.M.Sanu) 2.The Special Sale Officer, Urban Co-operative Bank, Thodupuzha P.O, Thodupuzha. O R D E R SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)
The complaint is filed for restraining the opposite party from attaching the property of the complainant for the realization of excess interest and exorbitant expenses.
The complainant availed a loan of Rs.40,000/- from the opposite party bank in the year 2003 and she repaid about Rs.20,000/- in the said loan. The opposite party bank filed a case against the complainant for Rs.50,050/- calculating excess interest and exorbitant expenses. A demand notice issued by the opposite party to the complainant stating that the property of the complainant would be sold out in auction sale by the opposite party. The petition is filed for restraining the opposite party from attaching the property of the complainant for the realization of excess interest and exorbitant expenses.
2. As per the written version of the opposite party, the petition is not maintainable because the dispute regarding the complainant and the opposite party will come under the Co-operative Societies Act 1969. The complainant is a member of the co-operative society as membership No.11885. The complainant availed a loan of Rs.40,000/- from the bank on 18.08.2003 for the purpose of business. The repayment of the loan was in 50 equal installments with 13% interest. At the time of receiving the loan, the opposite party received an equitable mortgage of 1.341 cents of land in Sy.No.223/3 of Thodupuzha village by creating a bond in favour of the bank. The entire loan became in due and a case was filed before arbitration, an order was passed in favour of the opposite party. This arbitration was not challenged by the complainant till now. The complaint is filed by the complainant for avoiding the same. If there was any objection against the arbitration award, the complainant should have filed appeal against that. So the complaint may be dismissed.
3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ? 4. The son of the complainant was examined as PW1. Opposite party was examined as DW1 and Exts.R1 to R3 marked on the side of the opposite parties.
5. The POINT :- The complaint is filed against the exorbitant interest calculated by the opposite party bank and also against the attachment of the property of the complainant. The son of the complainant was examined as PW1. As per PW1, the complainant is a lady of 82 years old who is laid up due to severe disease. The complainant received the loan for the cultivation of pineapple and not for the business. She is an illetrate and not able to conduct any business. Because of the low yield of agriculture, the complainant was not able to repay the loan in time. At the time of availing the loan, the complainant was not aware that the purpose of the loan was business. The opposite party got signature of the complainant in various places at the time of availing the loan. The only property of the complainant is 1.341 cents of land in Thodupuzha village. PW1 is running business in that property and the only income for the whole family is from the business conducted by PW1. The complainant is depending on PW1 for her livelihood. PW1 is also ready for repayment of the loan. The opposite party was examined as DW1, who is the General Manager of the Bank. He deposed that the loan is availed for the purpose of business. Ext.P1 is the copy of the application of the loan. The entire loan was became in due and an arbitration award is filed against the complainant and it is not challenged by the complainant anywherelse. The interest rate for the loan was 13%. As per Ext.R1, the loan is availed for the purpose of business. The property of 1.341 cents of land in Sy.No.223/3 of Thodupuzha Village was pledged before the bank for the security of the loan. It is admitted by PW1 that the complainant is doing business in the same premises and the complainant is depending on PW1 for her livelihood. PW1, the son of the complainant is ready to repay the loan availed from the opposite party bank. So we think that the complainant is an age old lady of 82 years and the son of the complainant availed the loan from the opposite party bank in the name of the complainant for doing the business. The complainant or her son never challenged the arbitration award or any procedure of the opposite party before this petition. So we think that the petition is filed only for delaying the procedure of opposite party and not for any gain. The son of the complainant is ready to repay the loan. The bank has acted upon the laws and regulations of Co-operative Societies Act. So there is no deficiency is seen from the part of the bank or any unfair trade practice seen from the opposite party. But the bank should consider a lenient view in the realisation of the loan by way of installments from the 82 years old lady who is laid up due to disease and no other property owned by her.
Hence the petition is dismissed. No cost is ordered against the petitioner. But the bank should consider a lenient view in the realisation of the loan by way of installments from the 82 years old lady who is laid up due to disease and no other property owned by her.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 31st day of December, 2008 Sd/- SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)
Sd/- SMT.SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER)
Sd/- SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER) APPENDIX
Depositions : On the side of Complainant : PW1 - V.T.Babu On the side of Opposite Party : DW1 - Jacob
Exhibits: On the side of Complainant: Nil On the side of Opposite Party : Ext.R1 - Photocopy of Loan Agreement Ext.R2 - Photocopy of Jamyakkadapathram Ext.R3 - Photocopy of Execution Application for Revenue Recovery
| 
