Kerala

Thiruvananthapuram

CC/291/2022

R R Balachandran - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Secrtary,Kandala service co-oprative bank - Opp.Party(s)

27 Apr 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

PRESENT

 

               SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN           : PRESIDENT

          SMT.PREETHA G NAIR     : MEMBER

           SRI.VIJU.V.R                       : MEMBER

CC.NO.291/2022 (Filed on : 22/07/2022)

ORDER DATED : 27/04/2023

COMPLAINANT

Sri.R.R.Balachandran,

Ganga Sadanam,

Attipra, Kulathur.P.O

Trivandrum

(By Adv.Sasikumar.N)

                                                   VS

OPPOSITE PARTY

The Secretary,

Kandala Service Co-operative Society,

Thoongampara, Kattakada,

Thiruvananthapuram - 695512

(Exparte)

ORDER

SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN                  : PRESIDENT

1. This complaint is filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 and stood over to this date for consideration and this Commission passed the following order.

2.  This is a complaint filed by the complainant against the opposite party alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. After admitting the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party. On 15/09/2022, one counsel proposes to appear for the opposite party, but subsequently no vakalath or version filed by the opposite party and hence on 17/11/2022 the opposite party was called absent and set exparte.

3. The case of the complainant in short is that complainant was lured and attracted by the advertisement offers published by the opposite party introducing various chitti loans and visited the opposite party’s society and decided to avail the personal loan for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only). The opposite party assured the complainant that the loan amount could be disbursed only on the strength of solvent sureties and promised them that there will be no change in the agreemental conditions till the expiry of tenure of the loan. Believing the words of the opposite party, the complainant entered into an agreement. Thereupon, the complainant obtained his salary certificate and the same was submitted along with duly filled up application to the opposite party. After scrutiny, an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) was sanctioned and disbursed to the complainant. The complainant so far had remitted almost ¾ of the loan amount maintained with the opposite party. In the meantime, the opposite party had deliberately made some manipulations and material breach by committing fraud in the loan account and misrepresented and mislead the complainant to remit the balance amount in one of the chitty as suggested by the opposite party. However, the complainant realized this folly only after a much belated stage. Till date the complainant was not intimated by the opposite party either expressly or impliedly about the changes brought in by the introduction of a new chitty and clubbing the same with the existing loan designed solely by the wanton acts of the opposite party. Alleging deficiency in service the complainant approached this commission for redressing his grievances.

4.       The evidence in this case consists of PW1 and Exts.A1 & A2 from the side of the complainant. The opposite party being declared exparte, there is no affidavit or document from the side of the opposite party.

5.     The issues to be considered in this case

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief claimed in the complaint.
3. Order as to cost.

6.       Heard. Perused affidavit and documents. To substantiate the case of the complainant, the complainant himself sworn an affidavit as PW1 and Exts.A1 & A2 were marked. Ext.A1 is the letter dated 27/01/2022 addressed to the Deputy Director of Fisheries with a request to recover an amount of Rs.10%  each per month from the salary of the complainant. Ext.A2 is the copy of the lawyer notice issued on behalf of the complainant to the Director of Fisheries. There is no contra evidence from the side of the opposite party to discredit the evidence adduced by the complainant. The main allegation of the complainant is that the Secretary of the opposite party colluded with the employees of the society and manipulated a number of loan accounts maintained in the said society and it was informed that a vigilance case charged against the secretary. The complainant submits that he has remitted almost ¾ of the loan amount maintained with the opposite party. Another allegation raised by the complainant is that the opposite party had deliberately made some manipulations in the loan account misrepresent and mislead the complainant to remit the balance amount in one of the chitty as suggested by the opposite party. According to the complainant till the date of filing of this complaint, the complainant was not intimated by the opposite party either expressly or impliedly about the changes brought in by the introduction of a new chitty and clubbing the same with the existing loan designed solely by the wanton acts of the opposite party. The fact of knowledge of this structural change mooted by the opposite party were made known to the sureties only after a long gap of 14 years vide a letter dated 27/01/2020 ie Ext.A1 addressed to the Pay Disbursing Officer of the complainant. Soon on receiving intimation of the above communication the complainant send a letter to the opposite party denying the allegations. According to the complainant only a meager amount is actually due to as balance loan amount to the opposite party and the complainant is ready and willing to settle the amount under due process of loan. According to the complainant the clubbing of the chitty account without informing the complainant is illegal and arbitrary and ultra virus to the agreemental conditions between the complainant and the opposite party and hence the acts of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service. In the absence of any contra evidence from the side of the opposite party we accept the evidence adduced by the complainant. From the available evidence before this commission and in the absence of any contra evidence from the side of the opposite party, we find that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. In view of the above discussions, we find that this is a fit case to be allowed in part in favour of the complainant.

                In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party is directed not to initiate any salary recovery proceedings of the complainant in respect of the chitty amount of the complainant with the opposite party. The opposite party is directed to settle the account by referring the matter to any of the scheme for settlement to be arranged by the opposite party. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation along with Rs.2500/- (Rupees two thousand and five hundred only) as cost of the proceedings to the to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the amount except costs shall carry an interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order till date of realization / remittance.

          A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission, this the 27^th day of April 2023.

 

                                                                                                   Sd/-

P.V.JAYARAJAN    : PRESIDENT

                                                                                        Sd/-

        PREETHA G NAIR      : MEMBER

                                                                                          Sd/-

                          VIJU.V.R        : MEMBER

 

 

 

 

be/

 

 

 

APPENIDX

CC.NO.291/2022

 

List of witness for the complainant

PW1            - R.R.Balachandran

List of Exhibits for the complainant

Ext.A1         - Letter dated 27/01/2022 addressed to the Deputy Director of  Fisheries

Ext.A2         - Copy of the lawyer notice issued on behalf of the complainant to the Director of Fisheries.

List of witness for the opposite party – NIL

List of Exhibits for the opposite party- NIL

Court Exhibits                                   - NIL

 

                                                                                                       Sd/-

                                                                                                PRESIDENT