DATE OF FILING : 20.08.2010
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI
Dated this the 30th day of November, 2010
Present:
SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT
SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER
SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER
C.C No.181/2010
Between
Complainant : Leelamma Joseph W/o Joseph,
Nedumkunnel House,
Kombayar P.O,
Parathodu Village,
Idukki District.
(By Adv: Sijimon.K.Augustine)
And
Opposite Parties : 1. The Secretary,
Kerala State Housing Board,
Thiruvananthapuram.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Kerala State Housing Board,
Idukki Division,
Kattappana P.O.
3. The Accounts Officer,
Kerala State Housing Board,
Idukki Division,
Kattappana P.O.
(All by Advs: Jiby Sebastian & V.C.Sebastian)
O R D E R
SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)
The complainant availed a loan of Rs.1,50,000/- from the opposite parties for constructing a house. The complainant paid few instalments and due to the poor financial condition, she was not able to pay the balance instalments on time. According to the statement of the opposite parties, an amount of Rs.4,41,639/- is due to the opposite party as on 15.07.2010. The outstanding amount include penal interest, default interest and other hidden charges. The complainant filed an application before the opposite parties to avoid penal interest and default interest and also seeking instalments to remit the balance. The complainant also demanded the statement of accounts of her loan transaction showing the details regarding the payment made and also showing the details of interest, penal interest and default interest. But the opposite parties not cared to issue the same. The Government of Kerala as per the order(M.S)14/10/Housing dated 20.04.2010 declared a lot of privileges to the remittance of defaulted loan amount. As per that Govt. Order, it is directed to avoid penal interest and defaulted interest. The Government declared the scheme comes to end only on 30.09.2010. A letter was issued by the Ist opposite party to another loanee named Beenamma Rajanandan describing about the order of the Government. The complainant is ready to remit her loan instalments if the defaulted and penal interest are avoided by the opposite parties. But before the termination of the said scheme the opposite parties with ulterior motives issued auction notice stating that the complainant's property will put in auction on 31.08.2010 if the loan amount together with defaulted interest and penal interest remitted before that date. The complainant has every right to get the benefits of the scheme declared by the Government. The opposite parties have no right to put the property of the complainant in auction during the pendency of the scheme declared by the Government. Hence the complainant is entitled to get an order for restraining the opposite parties to put the property of the complainant in public auction. So this petition is filed for directing the opposite parties to avoid default interest and penal interest and also restraining the opposite parties from the auction sale of the property during the pendency of the Government scheme dated 20.04.2010.
2. As per the written version filed by the opposite parties, it is admitted that the complainant availed a loan of Rs.1,50,000/- from the opposite party for the construction of her residential building by executing an agreement with the Board. As per the agreement she is liable to remit the loan in 108 monthly instalments of Rs.3,745/- each. But the complainant had not remitted any single instalments of the loan. As per the annual income certificate issued by the Parathodu Village Officer on 28.09.1999, her annual income is Rs.68,000/-. The monthly instalment is only Rs.3,745/-. But the complainant had not remitted any instalment in the loan account. The opposite party initiated revenue recovery action only on 23.08.2007. The amount mentioned by the petitioner is only the revenue recovery requisition amount. The complainant is liable to pay interest @ 12% from 1.09.2007 onwards with 5% collection charge and Rs.10,000/- being the conveyance and notice charges. The opposite party charged only the interest, penal interest and default interest as per clause 6 of Mortgage Deed No.132/2000 of SRO, Udumbanchola dated 18.01.2000. This opposite party being a public undertaking will not impose any hidden charges. The opposite party informed the complainant to avail the OTS benefit within the time limit. The complainant had not submitted any request for statement of accounts to the office of the opposite party. The officials of the opposite party visited the complainant's residence and issued notices regarding RR and also informed the details of OTS. The complainant can close the loan by availing the OTS benefit on or before 30.09.2010, that is, the day of ending OTS scheme. The amount due to the Board as on 30.09.2010 is Rs.5,88,378/-. Less waivement as per OTS scheme is penal interest 100% ie, Rs.45,085/- and Default interest 70% ie, Rs.2,10,455/-. The balance to be remitted on or before 30.09.2010 is Rs.3,32,838/-. The RR Requisition amount as on 31.01.2008 is Rs.,4,41,639/-. The interest at the rate of 12% from 1.09.2007 to 30.09.2010 is Rs.1,59,135/-. The conveyance and other charges Rs.10,000/-and RR Collection charge(7.5% of requisition amount) is Rs.45,808/-. Hence the total as on 30.09.2010 is Rs.6,56,582/-. The complainant had to remit the instalments in time otherwise penal interest and default interest would be charged on the amount of the instalment.
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. No oral evidence adduced by the complainant and the opposite parties. Exts.P1 and P2 marked on the side of the complainant and Exts.R1 to R5(series) marked on the side of the opposite parties. Heard both parties.
5 .The POINT :- As per the complainant, she availed Rs.1,50,000/- as housing loan from the opposite parties. Due to the poor financial condition, she was not able to pay the EMIs in time. The opposite party issued RR notice and initiated auction proceedings on the property of the complainant. Ext.P2 is the copy of the letter issued to the complainant for the same. The opposite party calculated penal interest, default interest and other hidden charges in the Revenue Recovery requisition. As per the Government Order dated 20.04.2010 a lot of privileges were declared for the remittance of the defaulted loan amount. It is also directed to avoid penal interest, default interest etc. and the termination period of the scheme was on 30.09.2010. Before the termination period of the order from the Government, the opposite party initiated auction proceedings against the property of the complainant and the opposite party denied to give the benefits declared by the Government as per the order. Copy of the letter issued from the Secretary, Kerala State Housing Board, Thiruvananthapuram describing about the Govt. order dated 20.04.2010 is marked as Ext.P1. As per the opposite party, the loan was availed by the complainant after executing a mortgage deed, copy of the same is marked as Ext.R1. The opposite party is entitled to charge penal interest, default interest etc. for the defaulted loan amount. The complainant was having an annual income of Rs.68,000/- as on 28.09.1999 as per the certificate issued by the Village Officer, Parathodu, copy of which is marked as Ext.R2. The monthly instalment is only Rs.3,745/- and the complainant deliberately avoided the payment of the same. The statement of account of the loan is marked as Ext.R3. The opposite party issued a letter to the complainant on 16.10.2004 stating that as per the order from the Government, the complainant is entitled for the OTS scheme and the auction proceedings will be avoided if the defaulted amount is paid within the time limit, Ext.R4 is the copy of the same. But the complainant never paid the amount and so revenue recovery proceedings were initiated against the complainant.
6. As per the opposite party, they issued OTS benefit to the complainant which is about Rs.2,55,540/- and the balance ought to have remitted on or before 30.09.2010 by the complainant as per the scheme declared by the Government. The termination period of the scheme declared by the Government was on 30.09.2010. But as per the complainant the opposite party never acted as per the order of the Government. The opposite party initiated RR proceedings and auction proceedings against the complainant within the termination period of the scheme declared by the Government as per the order. So the complainant was not given a chance to settle the account of the complainant's loan as per the scheme declared by the Government. Ext.R5(series) letters show that the opposite party informed the complainant about the OTS scheme as per the Govt. Order. But there is no evidence to show that the letters have been issued to the complainant by the opposite party. No Postal Acknowledgement Cards or postal receipts for the delivery of the same has produced by the opposite party. The learned counsel for the complainant argued that the opposite party never
included the complainant's loan in any of the scheme declared as per the Government Order dated 20.04.2010. Even before the termination of the scheme declared by the Government, the opposite party issued RR Notice and initiated auction proceedings against the property of the complainant. Ext.P2 shows the same, which is dated 16.07.2010. It is a gross deficiency from the part of the opposite parties. So we think that the opposite parties ought to have given a chance to the complainant for settling her loan account and also the benefits of the scheme in the repayment of the loan as per the Government Order dated 20.04.2010 and Ext.P1 letter.
Hence the petition partially allowed. The opposite parties are directed to give a chance to the complainant for repayment of her loan, as per the benefits declared in the Govt. Order dated 20.04.2010 and Ext.P1 letter.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 30th day of November, 2010
Sd/-
SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)
Sd/-
SMT. SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER)
Sd/-
SMT. BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)
APPENDIX
Depositions :
On the side of Complainant :
Nil
On the side of Opposite Parties :
Nil
Exhibits:
On the side of Complainant:
Ext.P1 - Photocopy of letter issued by the Secretary, Kerala State Housing Board, Thiruvananthapuram to another loanee named Beenamma Rajanandan
describing about the Government Order dated 20.04.2010
Ext.P2 - Photocopy of RR Notice dated 16.07.2010 issued by the opposite parties
On the side of Opposite Parties :
Ext.R1 - Photocopy of Mortgage Deed between the complainant and the opposite parties
Ext.R2 - Photocopy of Income Certificate dated 28.09.1999 issued by the Village Officer, Parathodu
Ext.R3 - Copy of Statement of Account of the loan
Ext.R4 - Photocopy of opposite party's Notice dated 16.10.2004 addressed to the complainant
Ext.R5(a) - Photocopy of letter dated 10.06.2005 issued by the 3rd opposite party to the complainant, describing about the OTS Scheme
Ext.R5(b) - Photocopy of 3rd opposite party's letter dated 06.12.2006 addressed to the complainant, describing about the OTS Scheme
