Useful Information Customer Care Address Popular Judgments
FAQ Consumer Forum Reliance Karnataka Country Club Bajaj Allianz State Bank Of India
Court Fee Airtel Chandigarh Idea ICICI Lombord Andhra Bank
Where to file Complaint Vodafon Bengal Tata Indicom HDFC Standard Life HDFC Bank
Notice Sample Idea Uttarakhand Airtel IffcoTokio Icici Bank
First Appeal Consumer Forum BSNL Gujarat Reliance Metlife Punjab National Bank
Consumer Protection Act Nokia Rajasthan Vodafone SBI Life Insurance Bank Of India
RTI for Banks Micromax Assam Mobile Store Reliance General Insurance Canara Bank
Insurance Ombudsman Lava Uttar Pradesh MTNL New India Insurance Bank Of Baroda
Banking Ombudsman Karbonn Jharkhand Birla Sun Life National Insurance United India Insurance
How to start DND Sony Bihar LIC Oriental Insurance State Bank Mysore
Irctc TATA AIG India Bank


+ Submit Your Complaint
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: muthoot finance

  1. #1
    admin is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,015

    Default muthoot finance

    COMPLAINANT Mrs. K. Vidya, Aged 45 years, Wife of Mr. A. Raghu, Presently residing at No. 26, 2nd Main Road, Vasantha Nagar, Bangalore – 560 052. Advocate (P.C. Narasimhaiah)


    V/s.

    OPPOSITE PARTY


    M/s. Muthoot Finance, No. 11/2, Cambridge Road, Ulsoor, Bangalore – 560 008. Represented by its Manager. Advocate (S.D.N. Prasad)


    O R D E R


    This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the
    Muthoot Finance to release the golden ornaments weighing 340 worth Rs.4,00,000/- by receiving the principal amount with R.B.I rate of interest and to restrain Muthoot Finance from auctioning the golden ornaments pledged on an allegations of deficiency in service.

    The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under: Complainant availed a gold loan of Rs.1,65,000/- from
    Muthoot Finance on 10.11.2005 by pledging her golden ornaments. Towards the security she has also issued a cheque drawn on Canara Bank on 06.01.2007. When she visited the Muthoot Finance to know about the rate of interest amount in due Muthoot Finance voluntarily enhanced the loan for another Rs.70,699/- and after deducting the so called interest they paid her Rs.7,110/-. Even on that day also Muthoot Finance did not disclose the rate of interest. On 24.04.2008 when she went to the Muthoot Finance to redeem her gold ornaments by clearing the loan, to her utter shock and surprise Muthoot Finance made a claim of Rs.3,39,714/-, which is unjust and improper. Complainant demanded for the statement of accounts, it was not considered. With all that arbitrarily Muthoot Finance intended to auction the said golden ornaments by causing some notice.

    The repeated requests and demands made by the complainant not to take such coercive steps, went in futile. For no fault of her, she is forced to face both mental agony and financial loss. Under the circumstances she felt the deficiency in service. Hence she is advised to file this complaint and sought for the relief accordingly.



    2. On appearance,
    Muthoot Finance filed the version denying all the allegations made by the complainant in toto. According to Muthoot Finance complainant is a chronic defaulter in payment of the interest and the principal, though she availed the loan in the year 2005. Of course on 06.01.2007 Muthoot Finance enhanced the said loan and sanctioned additional amount of Rs.70,699/-, then after deducting the interest in due they paid balance of Rs.7,110/-.



    Complainant received the said sum without any protest. The rate of interest was disclosed by them on 06.01.2007 as well as 10.11.2005. Complainant is an educated women she having understood the loan terms and conditions availed the same. She kept in due of both interest and principal, which is accrued to the tune of Rs.3,39,714/- as on 24.04.2008.
    Muthoot Finance has got a legal right to demand the same, in default they retained their right to auction the said golden ornaments pledged and recover the amount in due. That act of the Muthoot Finance does not amounts to deficiency in service or unfair trade practice. Though Muthoot Finance made several requests and demands, complainant failed to make payment of the amount in due.


    Of course
    Muthoot Finance is a non-banking financial company, there is no compulsion that it should impose the interest as per the R.B.I rules. The other allegations made in the complaint are baseless.


    When the complainant herself is a defaulter, she cannot seek an equitable relief of injunction restraining
    Muthoot Finance from auctioning the said pledged golden ornaments towards the recovery of the amount in due.


    The complaint is devoid of merits. Among these grounds,
    Muthoot Finance prayed for the dismissal of the complaint. 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed the affidavit evidence and produced some documents. Muthoot Finance has also filed the affidavit evidence and produced the documents. Then the arguments were heard.


    4. In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this complaint are as under: Point No. 1 :- Whether the complainant has proved the deficiency in service on the part of the
    Muthoot Finance? Point No. 2 :- If so, whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs now claimed? Point No. 3 :- To what Order?



    5. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, both oral and documentary evidence and the arguments advanced. In view of the reasons given by us in the following paragraphs our findings on: Point No.1:- In Negative Point No.2:- Negative Point No.3:- As per final


    Order.



    R E A S O N S


    6. At the outset it is not at dispute that the complainant availed a gold loan of Rs.1,65,000/- on 10.11.2005 and executed the necessary loan documents. After 10.11.2005 up to 06.01.2007 she has not made any correspondence with the
    Muthoot Finance nor there is any proof of payment of interest accrued on the loan or having made payment of the principal amount. On 06.01.2007 Muthoot Finance enhanced the loan for another Rs.70,699/- and after deducting the interest of Rs.63,589/- they paid Rs.7,110/-. Complainant acknowledged the receipt of the same without any protest. That means to say complainant is aware of the rate of interest that is going to be charged on the said gold loan. Now complainant is estopped from saying that the rate of interest was not disclosed to her.


    7. It is further contended by the complainant that on 24.04.2008 she went to redeem her gold ornaments with the hope to close the loan account. At that time
    Muthoot Finance made a demand of Rs.3,39,714/-. According to the complainant this demand is illegal and arbitrary against to the agreed rate of interest. Complainant has not produced any other documents to show what is the rate of interest that is agreed between the parties. When complainant failed to make payment of the amount in due Muthoot Finance got issued the notice on 17.05.2008 demanding her to pay the amount in due on or before 27.05.2008 otherwise they will auction the pledged golden ornaments. When complainant herself is a defaulter she cannot allege the deficiency in service against the Muthoot Finance.



    8.
    Muthoot Finance while causing the said notice gave the details of the amount in due including that of interest, rate of interest, etc. Under such circumstances the contention of the complainant that Muthoot Finance failed to disclose the actual rate of interest does not hold force. Of course when complainant failed to make payment of the said amount in due inspite of sufficient and reasonable opportunity being given they thought of auctioning the said ornaments by issue of public auction notice. That act of the Muthoot Finance cannot be termed as deficiency in service. It is said he who seeks equity, must do equity and must come with clean hands. But here the approach of the complainant is otherwise. Under such circumstances she cannot seek equitable relief of injunction restraining Muthoot Finance from exercising its contractual obligations and legal rights.


    9. On the plain reading of the allegations made in the complaint, in our view the complaint did not spell out a case of hiring of service and suffering from deficiency, rather it disclosed a case relating to settlement of accounts and for the balance due on the basis of the accounts. The complainant did not fall within the ambit of sec-2(1) (c) (e) of the C.P. Act. If the complainant is so advised, she can file a regular Civil Suit to redress her grievance and seek proper remedy.


    10. This Forum cannot decide what should be the rate of interest, while sanctioning loan rate of interest is disclosed, complainant having agreed for the same availed the loan, hence in view of the discussions made by us in the above said paras, we are of the view that the complainant has utterly failed to prove the deficiency in service against the
    Muthoot Finance. As such she is not entitled for the relief claimed. The complaint appears to be devoid of merits. Accordingly we answer point nos.1 and 2 in negative and proceed to pass the following:


    O R D E R



    The complaint is dismissed. In view of the nature of dispute no order as to costs. (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 26th day of March 2009.) MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
    Regards,
    Admin,

    ** PMs asking me for support will be deleted unless I've asked you to PM me with additional details **

  2. #2
    Sidhant's Avatar
    Sidhant is offline Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,742

    Default muthoot finance

    1. The case of the complainant is that on 31-01-2004 he availed a loan of Rs.67,000/- from opposite party by pledging 67gms of gold ornaments. The agreed rate of interest was 18%. On 23-8-2004 when he approached opposite party to redeem the pledge and take back the ornaments. Opposite party demanded to pay Rs.11,956/- as interest together with the principal amount of Rs.67,000/-. Since he had no other way he paid the amount as demanded by opposite party. When he protested against the demand of interest over above the rate agreed opposite party told him that he could come and collect petty amount of Rs.150/-. Complainant issued a letter to the Regional Manager stating his grievance. There was no reply. Hence this complaint alleging deficiency in service and praying to allow Rs.8,000/- towards the financial loss sustained by him.


    2. Opposite party filed version stating that the relationship between parties is that of Debtor, Creditor relationship and that there is no consumer relationship. Opposite party admits the transaction of pledge and has also stated that the agreed rate of interest was 18%. It is submitted that the period of loan was fixed as 6 months and that complainant was liable to pay monthly interest. Complainant did not remit any monthly interest. That therefore complainant is liable make the loss sustained by opposite party. That a computerized receipt was issued to complainant for the amount collected from him. That the complaint is illmotivated, fabricated and is to be dismissed.


    3. Evidence consists of the oral evidence of complainant who was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A4 marked for him. Opposite party filed counter affidavit. Exts.B1 and B2 marked for opposite party.


    4. Points for consideration:-
    (i) Whether complainant is a consumer.
    (ii) Whether opposite party has committed deficiency in service.
    (iii) If so, reliefs and costs.


    5. Point (i):-
    Though opposite party has stated in the version that as per precedents rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court and National Commission the transaction between Pawner and a Pawnee is that of Debtor and Creditor, opposite party has not placed before us any relevant citations. A pawn is a security whereby a deposit of goods is made by contract as security for a debt. Section 2(o) defines 'Service' to include the provisions of facilities in connection with banking and financing. The service availed herein is that of availing loan on the security of goods. This in our view definitely comes within the purview of service as defined in the Consumer Protection Act. We therefore hold that complainant is a consumer and the complaint is maintainable.


    6. Point (ii):-
    Admittedly complainant availed a loan of Rs.67,000/- and the interest rate agreed was 18%. As per Ext.A2 receipt it is seen that opposite party has collected Rs.11,956/- as interest along with principal amount of Rs.67,000/-. Opposite party has not specifically denied that they have not collected Rs.11,956/-. It is revealed that opposite party has collected interest @ 30.59%. If interest @ 18% is applied for 7 month of the pledge period the interest would be only Rs.8,840/-. Opposite party has not stated any details of the calculation of interest levied by them. In fact there is no contra evidence adduced by opposite party. Though opposite party filed counter affidavit, opposite party did not mount the box to face cross examination inspite of the orders of this Forum allowing the prayer of complainant to cross examine opposite party.

    In Vidhyadhar Vs. Manikarao and Anr (1999) 35CC 573 the Apex Court observed that, where a party to the suit does not appear in the witness box and state his own case on oath and offer himself to be cross examined by the other side, a presumption would arise that the case set up by him is not correct. The opposite party herein does not even have a specific case of defense. Their contentions are merely vague. Opposite party relied upon Ext.B1 whichis submitted to be a pledge agreement. In Ext.B1 the spaces for entering the rate of interest and period loan are left unfilled. Ext.B1 is unstamped. The wordings in Ext.B1 purport the intention of creating a pronote transaction. Though the document is brought on record it cannot be considered admissible in evidence being unstamped. Complainant has amply proved and established a case in his favour. The collection of interest over and above the agreed rate of interest is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. We find opposite party deficient in service.



    7. Point (iii):-
    From the above discussions we hold that complainant is entitled to refund of Rs.3,116/- (11,956 Ė 8840). He is also to be compensated for the deficiency meted by him. In our view refund of the said amount with interest @ 9% per annum from date of complaint till payment would be adequate relief to the complainant. He is also entitled to cost of Rs.1,000/-.



    8. In the result, we allow the complaint and order opposite party to pay to the complainant Rs.3,116/- (Rupees Three thousand one hundred and sixteen only) with interest @ 9% per annum from date of complaint (15-01-2005) till payment together with costs of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

  3. #3
    Advocate.sonia's Avatar
    Advocate.sonia is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    790

    Default muthoot finance

    The allegations in the complaint are the following: The complainant had procured a Maruthi /Omni/CNG/LPG/MARUTHI OMNI LPG STD BS III (5 SEATER) with Reg. No. KL 21/5152 by paying an amount of Rs. 2,47,832/- from the Indus Motors, Trivandrum, the authorized dealer of the manufacturer Maruti Udyog, as per invoice No. VSL 05016398 dated 18.01.2007.

    The complainant had paid 15 years tax at Rs. 18,800/-. Besides this the complainant had spent as much as Rs. 29,000/- for various luxury fittings, protective coatings, sun film, Sony CD Player, additional speakers and so on. The vehicle was hypothecated to M/s Muthoot Leasing and Finance Ltd., Thiruvananthapuram and availed a loan for a sum of Rs. 2,20,000/- on 31.01.2007 as per hypothecation No. 45127 and equated monthly instalment is fixed illegally at Rs. 5,234/-. The complainant had remitted a total amount of Rs. 79,073/- including bulk remittance of an amount of Rs. 20,500/- paid on 25.08.2008. The payments were illegally accounted towards penal interest of Rs. 7,997/-.

    The interest charged is camouflaged as finance charge in order to get away from the financial regulations contemplated under the Kerala State Money Lenders Act and the Reserve Bank Regulations and the same is arrived at Rs. 94,050/- without any rhyme or reason after stipulating an interest at 8.55% and the total interest worked out for a period of 60 months. The afore mentioned interest is divided over a period of 60 months along with the principal amount which is excessive, arbitrary and purported to make unfair and undue enrichment against law and ethics. This will not fit in the usual system of quarterly rest or annual rest calculation of interest followed by financial institutions and is clearly an unscrupulous exploitation. The vehicle met with an accident on 23.06.2007 at 1.30 a.m at Thekkinkad, Nagaroor village, Thiruvananthapuram district.

    The opposite parties are informed that a claim for a sum of Rs. 2,35,000/- was preferred for the totally damaged vehicle through the Hon'ble Permanent Lok Adalat and the accident caused impossibility in performing the regular remittance after six months of payment as the accident occurred within 6 months of purchase. The opposite parties received the fruits of the said litigation before the Hon'ble Permanent Lok Adalat amounting to Rs. 1,40,000/- on 18.09.2008 among other direct payments. Surprisingly a notice dated 09.09.2007 was sent by the counsel of the opposite parties calling upon the complainant to remit Rs. 2,43,858/- within 15 days of the date of notice against which a reply has already been sent by the counsel for the complainant. The opposite parties claimed an amount in the notice whereas the claim before arbitration is in excess of what is stated in the notice and thus arbitrary and a deficiency in service.

    There is no justifiable reason in invoking the hard and inequitable provisions of the un-negotiated printed term agreement containing unfair terms of contract when the vehicle was damaged following an accident beyond the control of the complainant or the opposite parties. The actions of the opposite parties amount to an unfair trade practice, deficiency in service and unscrupulous exploitation. The complainant is entitled to the waiver of any further payment owing to the accident which is an act of God. At any rate the complainant is not liable to pay interest on the loan beyond the period of accident. Hence this complaint has been necessitated.

    The opposite parties inspite of acceptance of notice from this Forum has neither filed version nor has contested the matter. Hence opposite parties were set exparte.

    The following issues arise for consideration:

    1.

    Whether the opposite parties have received any amount as alleged in the complaint?
    2.

    Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
    3.

    Whether the complainant is entitled for any of the reliefs claimed?

    Points (i) to (iii):- The hypothecation agreement Ext. P5 entered into between the opposite parties and the complainant on 31.01.2007 reveals that the vehicle mentioned in the complaint has been hypothecated for an amount of Rs. 2,20,000/-. Ext. P1 proves the payment of one thousand on 31.03.2008, Rs. 5,234/- on 30.06.2008 and Rs. 20,500/- on 27.08.2008. The complainant has produced Ext. P4 which is the status report as on 27.09.2008. The complainant has sworn that he had remitted a total amount of Rs. 79,073/- including bulk remittance of an amount of Rs. 20,500/- paid on 25.08.2008. The complainant has not been cross examined and hence his affidavit stands unchallenged. The complainant has further pleaded that Ext. P3 is the copy of the receipt of insurance payment of Rs. 1,40,000/- by the opposite party. The opposite parties have never turned up to contest the same or deny the allegations levelled against them. In the absence of the same and since the allegations in the complaint stand uncontroverted, this Forum come to the conclusion that the complainant is not liable to pay any further amount towards the loan.

    In the result, the complaint is allowed. Complainant is found not liable to pay any amount to the opposite parties on account of the Ext. P5 hypothecation agreement. The opposite parties shall also pay an amount of Rs. 2,000/- towards compensation and Rs. 1,000/- towards costs of the proceedings. Time for compliance one month from the date of receipt of the order failing which the entire amount shall carry interest @ 12%.

  4. #4
    adv.sumit is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,363

    Default Muthoot Finance

    Sanila Moideen
    ...........Appellant(s)

    Vs.

    Manager,Muthoot Leasing & Finance Ltd
    ...........Respondent(s)







    ORDER






    The complainantís case is as follows: The original complainant purchased a Maruti Wagonor Car No.KL-8/AJ-9725 by availing loan from the respondent on condition that the loan amount will be refunded by 60 monthly instalments at the rate of Rs.8253/- each. The original complainant is represented by Power of Attorney Holder and the copy is produced.


    The complainant has repaid some instalments at Rs.8253/- each and also paid Rs.2,42,000/- on 7.2.2008, Rs.25,000/- on 24.3.2008 and Rs.15,000/- on 27.6.2008. Thus the complainant has repaid the entire loan amount. But the R.C. and I.C. have not been returned. In the meantime the respondents with their gundas tried to seize the vehicle by force. Hence the complaint is filed to restrain the respondents from forcible seizure of the vehicle and also to return the cheques and documents received from the sureties.

    2. The respondent called absent and set exparte.

    3. The complainant filed affidavit and documents to prove the case. The documents are marked as Exts. P1 series.

    4. The complainantís case is that she purchased a Maruti Waganor car No.KL-8/J-9725 by availing loan from the respondents on condition that the loan amount will be repaid by 60 monthly instalments at the rate of Rs.8253/- each. The complainant has repaid the entire amount. But the R.C. and I.C. certificates were not returned. In the meantime the respondents tried to seize the vehicle with their gundas.


    They are also trying to misuse the cheques and other documents received from the sureties. Since the entire loan amount has been repaid the complainant is entitled to get the R.C. and I.C.and also the documents received from the sureties for availing the loan. Even though there is no evidence to the contrary there is no piece of paper produced by the complainant to show the closing of transaction. So the complainant is not entitled to the entire reliefs sought.

    5. In the result, complaint is partly allowed and the respondent and their men are restrained from seizing the vehicle forcibly. The respondent is directed to pay Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) as costs to the litigation within a month.

  5. #5
    Unregistered Guest

    Default Encashment of bonds

    Sir,
    I am a customer of Your Kottayam Br. On 5/12/09 I have approached the branch for encashment of four bonds amounting a total sum of 4 lacs, on maturity. The amount was planed for some important commitment on 07/12/09. But the branch, instead of giving the cash gave me a chque for the amount which would only be encashed by the end of Dec 2nd week. This unexpected action from such a popular and prompt firm really pushed me into trouble.

    At this point I am really sorry to say that I am worried about my left over investments with your firm !!!!!

    And this bitter experience has made me to think twice before making further investments.

    Your comment in this matter is highly solicited...

    Vinod P
    vinodaf@yahoo.com

  6. #6
    adv.singh is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,003

    Default muthoot finance

    Appeal(A) No. A/09/442

    Muthoot Gold Loans
    ...........Appellant(s)

    Vs.

    P.Ramesh Babu
    ...........Respondent(s)


    BEFORE:
    1. JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU


    Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


    OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


    For the Appellant :


    For the Respondent :

    ORDER


    KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

    FIRST APPEAL 442/09
    JUDGMENT DATED: 29.12.09
    Appeal filed against the order passed by CDRF, Malappuram in OP.298/03

    PRESENT
    JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT

    The Branch Manager, :APPELLANT
    Muthoot Gold Loans,
    Malappuram Branch,
    Downhill, Malappuram.

    (By Adv.C.M.Stephen)

    vs.

    P.Ramesh Babu, : RESPONDENT
    S/o Balakrishnan Nair,
    Vaishnavi, Downhill,
    Malappuram.
    JUDGMENT

    JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT


    The appellant is the opposite party in OP 298/03 in the file of CDRF, Malappuram. The appellant is under orders to pay a sum of Rs.2774.50/- with interest at 9% from 12.11.2003 and also cost of Rs.1000/-.
    2. It is the case of the complainant that he pledged 64 gms of gold ornaments with the opposite party on 13.2.03 and availed loan of Rs.27,000/- with the interest advertised and agreed by the opposite party as Rs.1.50 per month for every Rs.100/-. On 3.11.03 the complainant wanted to redeem the pledge and the appellant demanded Rs.33,326/- towards settlement of account. According to the complainant the opposite parties refused to issue receipt. On his insistance a receipt was issued simply mentioning that Rs.27,000/- and interest from 13.2.2003 was paid . He has sought for return of the excess amount collected.
    3. It is the contention of the opposite party/appellant that the agreed period of loan was 6 months. The complainant was bound to redeem the pledge within 13.8.03 or else he has liable to pay penal interest. As per the pledge agreement complainant has to pay monthly interest which was not remitted. The interest was collected only as per the agreed terms. It is contended that proper receipt was issued. The complainant came on the next day and asked for a duplicate copy of the receipt alleging that he lost the original. As the Manager was not authorized to issue duplicate receipt he asked the complainant to come after one week. But the complainant got angry and walked away.
    4. The evidence adduced consisted of Exts.A1,A2 and B1.
    5. I find that Ext.P1 produced by the complainant which is mentioned as the loan agreement contains conditions. It is mentioned that interest due on each month should be remitted so that penal interest can be avoided. It is also mentioned that the loan amount and interest should be remitted back within 6 months failing which the pledged articles will be sold in auction.
    6. The Forum has found that Ext.A2 receipt simply mentioned that Rs.33325/- was received on 3.11.2003. It was held that non issuance of proper receipt is an unfair trade practice.
    7. I find that Ext.A1 produced by the complainant is mentioned as the gold loan ledger with respect to the particular transaction bearing only the amount debited and credited as Rs.27000/- each. Ext.A2 is a receipt written by hand wherein it is noted only the amount received in total.
    8. I find that Ext.B1 agreement containing the conditions did not specify as to exactly what will be the penal interest if the interest or the instalment amount is not remitted each month. The rate of penal interest is not mentioned. According to the counsel for the appellant what they meant by penal interest is compound interest . I am not in a position to accept the above contention. The same could have been properly specified in Ext.B1. I find that the interest portion collected on 3.11.03 would work out to 24%. The Forum has directed the opposite party to return the excess amount over and above the 18% which is the allegedly agreed rate. It is pertinent to note that Ext.P1 also did not contain any mention about the agreed rate of interest. The colums in this regard are blank. Hence the finding of the Forum that it is unfair trade practice in not issuing proper receipts. I find that rate of interest and what is the penal interest ought to have been mentioned in B1 agreement itself. In the circumstances I find no interference is called for in the order of the Forum. The appeal is dismissed.
    The Office is directed to return the LCR to the Forum urgently.

  7. #7
    gaganjeet singh Guest

    Exclamation complaint regarding bad service muthoot finance

    good day sir , i am gaganjeet singh residing in jammu .. my loan no. is 0002867 and the plan is true value personal loan.. i just wanted to tell you about your poor services that you are providing to the customers... i am dealing with you from the last 2 yrs and also i had provided lots of customers to you but today when i went to you office situated in jammu for the repayment , your office staff has behaved so badly with me.. its 4:40 pm that time and they are closing their shuters .. i told dem to take my payment but they replied that the " time is over now so please go and dont waste our time.." see is this the facility you are proving to your customers..? this is my last dealing with you.. and i assure you that from the next time i wont be dealing with you or any of your company.. i am sorry to say you , your staff is so ill mannered.. kindly check your staff so that they dont behave badly with th eother client of yours..

    gagan jeet singh..

  8. #8
    Unregistered Guest

    Red face account status

    Quote Originally Posted by gaganjeet singh View Post
    good day sir , i am gaganjeet singh residing in jammu .. my loan no. is 0002867 and the plan is true value personal loan.. i just wanted to tell you about your poor services that you are providing to the customers... i am dealing with you from the last 2 yrs and also i had provided lots of customers to you but today when i went to you office situated in jammu for the repayment , your office staff has behaved so badly with me.. its 4:40 pm that time and they are closing their shuters .. i told dem to take my payment but they replied that the " time is over now so please go and dont waste our time.." see is this the facility you are proving to your customers..? this is my last dealing with you.. and i assure you that from the next time i wont be dealing with you or any of your company.. i am sorry to say you , your staff is so ill mannered.. kindly check your staff so that they dont behave badly with th eother client of yours..

    gagan jeet singh..

    hi my name is ashish singh (jaipur)

    how can i know my gold account stasus.


    ashish.singh.jadoon@gmail.com




    hi my name is ashish singh (jaipur)

    how can i know my gold account stasus.


    ashish.singh.jadoon@gmail.com

  9. #9
    dimplec is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Hi,

    Still not received the refund from Muthoot finance IPO for application no-2290000019413462.
    The application made for 160 shares but 0 alloted.The refund according to the site was due on
    3rd May but still not processed.Pls process the refund asap and confirm.

  10. #10
    jsunku is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1

    Default Not responding to the problem ( Late Response)

    Hi,

    My Name is Jagan Babu sunku, residing at kothagudem khammam district, A.P. My father, Rajaiah. Sunku taken the gold loan at Muthoot Finance, Kothagudem branch, Khammam District Andhra Pradesh. Recently my father was expired. At the time of taking gold loan, my father has given the nominee name as my mother name.

    when we approached the muthoot finance, Kothagudem branch, branch manager asked the death certificate. we have submitted death certificate and Lawyer affidavit also and govt issued ration card also and more over we have cleared the all the interest payments which were due to till date and we have payed the actual principal amount which was taken by father ( by keeping the just rs100 as pending).

    kothagudem branch Manager and employees are asking us to wait for 5 days, but they are telling the same answer from the last two months. They are irritating us and we are getting same answer that need to wait for few more days until we get the response from the head office. Here i didnt get why this issue is taking this much time even we have submitted the death certificate, affidavit and ration card.

    Thanks,
    Jagan Babu. Sunku

  11. #11
    Loan against Gold Guest

    Default Misconduct and confined mentality of HDFC Kolkata employees

    My brother and mother went to HDFC Tollygunge Branch in Kolkata for having Loan against Gold as directed by their representative to contact that branch for that purpose. What happened with them know in their words "We were in urgent need of some money and we arrived at the branch at 11am. It was told to us it takes max of 30 min. But here it was said it takes 2 hours...that was okay as we were in need of loan. After 2 hours it was told to us on inquiry, it will take more 3 hours....again we waited and after waiting so much they at the time of document verification showed their true colour by misbehaving with us. Even they whispered that being of bihari we are thieves and they ill treated us. In Kokata it has become part od routine to humiliate and insult simple and educated biharis owing to their own reasons. According to them all biharis are gundas and accordingly they treat. First they rose questions on their ID's and Address proofs even all of them were authentic as we produced PAN Card, Voter Card, a bank staement of a Govt Bank, and Postpaid mobile bill. But they did not get satisfy and even they commented on us without knowing the fact that we have stolen the ornaments as we are bloody biharis as it seemed by their attitude. After 6 hours of waiting and humiliation we left their premises as they were not interesed in providing us loan and from there we only got frustration. In residing at places like this is really depressing for people like us as these people don't give a penny's value to biharis. But we are here only due to our Govt jobs but that days we really broke out. My mothers wept outside as after whole day's try we could not get loan even got targeted rudely by HDFC's empolyees. Lastly they say if we take the loan we will not get the loan amount on same day as other customers get because we don't belong to their community as they indicate by their attitude. Is there no branch of HDFC in Bihar as biharis are misbehaved and descriminated in bengal only while applying for loan. Two persons of same eligibility and same documents and same Govt jobs here are declined for loan only due to biased mentality. Shame on these people who only know to harass us but luckily we got narrow escape by these narrow minded people."

    People of here are needed to visit Patna and others places of excellence where biharis are really valued and live with dignity. When people of here would amend their mindset and communal proud attitude? It's reallyshame on people like these who don't understand others difficulty and get pleasure in putting others down and saying clown by their violent mindset.

  12. #12
    bharti bai Guest

    Default to issue a new cheque

    hi...i hv received a cheque frm mutthoot throught western union transaction..frm abroad..which my bro sent money...i hv lost d cheque..i hv lost d cheque...for that i hv gvn stop payment letter to muthoott n also to d south indian bank who issued dat cheque..by personaly i went to bank with mutthoot manager..submitted letter n rcvd dat rcpt...n gave to muthoot manager..coz she said she has to scan n send to higher officer to tk permission to issue a new cheque....dat old cheque ws issued before 5 months...till now they hv not issued me a new cheque....when i wl get my money back...itz nt a small amount.it ws 50k....plzz solve my problem

  13. #13
    sheelaashok2307@gmail.com Guest

    Default consumer act 1986 sec 12 against muthoot finance in car street branch salem tamilnadu

    RPL RATE OF INT 18% PER GRAM RS.2000 ON 31.01.2012 AND XPL RATE OF INT 22% PER GRAM RS.2200 0N 31.012012 . I PLEDGED 113.800 GRAMS RPL RECIVED RS.230000 AND 32 GRAMS XPL RECIVED RS.70000 BOTH ON 31.01.2012. DUE ON 30.04.2012 RPL,XPL INT 1% INCREASD ON MY GOLD LOAN AND REDUSED RS.600 BOTH.AS PER RBI GUID VALUE THEY SAID EFFECT FROM THE DATE OF 20.02.2012. DID NOT INFORM ME BEFORE OR AFTER THE DATE OF CHANGES. THIS IS COMING CONSUMER ACT UNDER 19 86 S EC 12. I RENIVAL MY RPL ON 30.04.2012 . RATE OF PER GRAM RS. 2000 THE SAME BEFORE , BUT INt . IS 19% .THIS IS COMING CONSUMER ACT 1986 SEC 12. MY ADDRESS M. ASHOKAN I08/2. BUNGALOW STREET SALEM 636001.TAMILNADU. CEL 9443828483.

  14. #14
    Unregistered Guest

    Default i have not received my blank check muthoot finance gold loan

    i am ijajur rahi...i hv not received a blank cheque frm mutthoot ti hv lost d cheque..i hv lost d cheque...for that i hv gvn stop payment letter to muthoott n also to d south indian bank who issued dat cheque..by personaly i went to bank with mutthoot manager..submitted letter n rcvd dat rcpt...n gave to muthoot manager..coz she said she has to scan n send to higher officer to tk permission to issue a new cheque....dat old cheque ws issued before months...till now they hv not issued me a new cheque....when i wl get my blank cheque.......plzz solve my problem

  15. #15
    Marella maheswarao Guest

    Default My gold was with out informing they auctioned

    Dear sir.
    My name is Marella maheswaro I have account in muthoot ongole main branch (0598) from 2011 account num 4683 .in previous I paid almost 3lacs interest also .i take gold loan 760000 in 9th November 2012 20th November 2012.i had received notice from muthoot on 16th June and i go to the branch talked with the manager on 20th June give me 15 days time I will clear amount with interest. They said ok. Today I go the branch with amount they are saying all ready packets sent to auction on 30th June sorry . That gold is our family sentiment sir so please help me sir.
    Yesterday July 14th here branch manager sent a request to head office they replied ok return the auction packets and know they don't know where is the auction packets please track our packets sir if auctioned please tell me the costumer address I will go and request them sir. I pay the amount sir please sir .... Iam waiting from muthoot from yesterday morning sir please help me sir. That gold is our family sentiment sir please sir help me sir
    Thanking you
    Marella maheswaro
    9941622212

+ Submit Your Complaint

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-09-2014, 12:35 PM
  2. Replies: 46
    Last Post: 06-26-2014, 09:17 PM
  3. Bajaj Finance, Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd.
    By Sidhant in forum Judgments
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-19-2013, 07:42 PM
  4. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-14-2013, 05:36 PM
  5. Muthoot Mercantile
    By admin in forum Judgments
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-06-2009, 06:03 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •