IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS’ DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSORE<br /> <br /> PRESENT: 1. Shri.A.T.Munnoli<br /> B.A., L.L.B (Spl.) - President <br /> <br /> 2. Smt.Y.V.Uma Shenoi<br /> M.Sc., B.Ed., - Member<br /> <br /> <br /> CC 324/09 DATED 13.10.2009<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> Complainant Sri. M.V. Venkatesh S/o late M. Venkatappa, Assistant, CHESCOM, Branch Office, R/at Door No.1569, Back side of Sri Rama Kalyana Mantapa, Batheri Road, Srirangapatna Town.<br /> <br /> (By Sri. N. Govinda, Advocate)<br /> <br /> Vs. <br /> Opposite Party The Manager, Union Bank of India, Mannar Complex, Ashoka Road, Mysore.<br /> <br /> (By Sri R. Suresh, Advcoate)<br /> Nature of complaint : Deficiency in service<br /> Date of filing of complaint : 28.08.2009<br /> Date of appearance of O.P. : 15.09.2009<br /> Date of order : 13.10.2009<br /> Duration of Proceeding : 28 days<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. A.T.Munnoli,<br /> President<br /> <br /> 1. The complainant has sought a direction to opposite party to refund excess 3 E.M.Is collected and also compensation of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony.<br /> <br /> 2. Amongst other facts in the complaint, it is alleged that the complainant had borrowed loan from the opposite party to purchase a bike. The loan was to be repaid in 60 E.M.Is of Rs.1,033/- every month. The amount of E.M.I was being deducted by the employer in the salary of the complainant and was being sent to opposite party. In all 63 installments have been deducted from the salary of the complainant by the employer as per the direction of the opposite party. In the month of June 2009 complainant went to the opposite party and on enquiry it was told, a sum of Rs.6,004/- is due. In fact all E.M.Is are paid. From the records it is noticed that the opposite party instead of taking the installments into credit every month, sometimes taken into credit 2 or 3 installments at a time. On account of it the opposite party has charged and claimed additional interest. The complainant is not liable to pay the same. Hence, it is prayed to allow the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. The opposite party in the written statement has denied material allegations in the complaint and it is contended that, on many occasions the cheques issued were delayed and hence, penal interest has been charged. Also it is contended that, the opposite party has remitted insurance amount in respect of the vehicle in question. Hence, it is prayed to dismiss the complaint.<br /> <br /> 4. To prove the respective contentions, both the parties have filed affidavit and certain documents are produced. We have heard the arguments and perused the entire material on record.<br /> <br /> 5. Now, the points for our consideration are as under.<br /> 1. Whether the complainant has proved any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and that he is entitled to the reliefs sought?<br /> 2. What order?<br /> 6. Our findings are as under:-<br /> Point no.1 : Affirmative <br /> Point no.2 : As per the order.<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 7. Point no. 1:- The loan that the complainant had availed from the opposite party to purchase bike as per the agreement and understanding between the parties was to be recovered from the salary of the complainant which was to be deducted by the employer and employer was to credited that amount to opposite party. In this regard absolutely there is no dispute.<br /> <br /> 8. The complainant contend that from his salary his employer regularly deducted installments or E.M.Is of some other borrowers also common cheque was sent to the opposite party. This specific stand taken by the complainant is not denied by the opposite party. To substantiate this fact, statement prepared by the employer has been produced by the complainant. Hence, it is clear that, the employer of the complainant used to deduct the installments of the complainant as well as other employees and through common cheque the amount was sent to opposite party. It is further specific case of the complainant that so for concerned to other employees or borrowers, the opposite party has taken the installments/E.M.Is in the credit of their respective loan accounts but failed to take the installments or E.M.Is pertaining to his loan account.<br /> <br /> 9. The opposite party has contended that, some times the amount was delayed and hence, interest has been charged. But first of all as noted above the employer of the complainant has deducted the E.M.Is regularly and common cheque was sent to opposite party. When that is so, there was no occasion or reason to make delayed payment as contended by opposite party. <br /> <br /> 10. The complainant contended that many a times the opposite party taken into credit at a time in one month several installments. In this regard with reference to the bank extract it is pointed out that for the month of February 2006 two installments, November 2008 two installments, November 2007 three installments, June 2008 three installments, December 2008 two installments, June 2007 six installments at a time are being taken into credit. On the other hand from the statement of account given by the employer of the complainant it is clear that, in respect of particular month common cheque was given to opposite party in respect of the installments pertaining to the complainant as well as other persons. When that is so, taking into credit several installments in one month and not taking the respective installments regularly every month, is fault on the part of the opposite party and it discloses deficiency in the service on the part of the opposite party, resulting for record purpose, delayed payment and consequently, it occasioned to charge penal interest. That was not the fault of the complainant.<br /> <br /> 11. Of course so for concerned to the claim of the opposite party that it has paid premium in respect of insurance policy of the vehicle in question, the complainant is liable to pay it. Accordingly, we answer the point No.1 in affirmative. <br /> <br /> 12. Point No. 2:- From the discussions made above and conclusion arrived at, we pass the following order: <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 1. The Complaint is allowed.<br /> 2. The opposite party is hereby directed to refund or repay the excess installments/E.M.Is collected from the complainant through his employer deducting three insurance premium ( E.M.I is Rs.1,043/- and insurance premium paid by the opposite party is Rs.797, 692, 706) The opposite party to pay the said amount within one month from the date of the order and on failure, the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 12% p.a.<br /> 3. The opposite party is hereby further directed to pay cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.<br /> 4. Give a copy of this order to each party according to Rules.<br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, transcript revised by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this the day 13th October 2009)<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (A.T.Munnoli) <br /> President <br /> <br /> <br /> (Y.V.Uma Shenoi)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />