Order dictated by:

Ms.Rachna Arora, Member

1.       Mr.Baljeet Singh complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 11 & 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that the complainant approached the opposite party on 30.6.2015 for getting personal loan by way of pledging the gold jewellery. At that time the opposite party required some documents or jewellery for  obtaining a personal loan and on return of the entire loan amount including interest amount without any default,  the opposite would hand over the pledged jewellery  items to the owner/complainant. The assurance of the opposite party the complainant pledged a gold chain of net weight of 8.30 gm and its price comes to Rs. 30000/-. The opposite party assured the complainant that after receiving the entire principal alongwith interest upto date, the opposite party will release the pledged gold chain to the complainant. In the month of April 2016 the complainant approached the opposite party to return the entire loan amount of Rs. 17033/- i.e. Rs. 14000/- plus interest amounts which comes to Rs. 3033/-  and requested the opposite party to release the pledged gold chain to the complainant. The complainant made so many personal visits to the opposite party for return the entire loan amount and for obtaining his pledged chain, but all the time the opposite party put off the matter on one pretext or the other . In the month of June 6,2016, the opposite party refused to hand over the chain to the complainant on the ground that “the said pledged items do not have any market value and we cannot redeem the said pledged items to you”. It is pertinent to mention here that the pledged chain items is moveable property and without defaulting of the complainant the opposite party have no right to use, sold or disburse of the said pledged chain at any cost without giving intimation to the complainant. The complainant issued legal notice to the opposite party on 27.6.2016 vide speed post No. EP383492215IN delivered on 28.6.2016 for release of pledged  gold chain for which also the opposite party have neither returned the pledged gold chain nor gave any reply to the complainant. Vide instant complaint, complainant has sought for the following reliefs:-

(a)     Opposite party be directed to release the pledged gold chain to the complainant alongwith interest @ 18% p.a.  from the due date till date of realization ;

(b)     Compensation to the tune of Rs. 50000/-  alongwith litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 15000/- be also awarded to the complainant.

Hence, this complaint.

2.       Upon notice, opposite party appeared and filed written version taking certain preliminary objections therein inter alia that present complaint is not maintainable and complainant has not come to the  Forum with clean hands ; that the complaint filed by the complainant is barred under the provisions of Consumer law and had no locus standi in the eyes of law ;  that the present complaint filed by the complainant is based on false grounds. The complainant has himself signed all the documents for availing the gold loan after going through the same ; that the complainant has not purchased any goods or availed any services of the opposite party. The complainant had taken a loan from the opposite party by pledging gold ornaments as security for the same after accepting terms and conditions ; that the complainant has filed the present complaint on the ground that complainant has approached the opposite party and has taken loan on 30.6.2015 worth Rs. 14000/- for personal use by pledging his good chain weighing 8.30 gm. That beside this principal amount the interest has also been added in the said loan amount  which was admitted by the complainant. The complainant himself admitted that in the month of April 2016 the complainant approached the opposite party to pay the entire loan amount of Rs. 17033/- which clearly shows that after availing the loan , the complainant did not make any amount towards the loan account. It is pertinent to mention here that the pledged gold chain has already been  auctioned by giving intimation to the complainant, as such the complainant  is no more consumer to the opposite party and this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint. The complainant is having only civil remedy as per civil law because the complainant is having contract of gold loan with the opposite party and bound to pay the principal amount alongwith interest within the stipulated period which was upto 25.3.2016. But the complainant has failed to do so. Thereafter the opposite party has issued intimation letter dated 2.4.2016 regarding auction of gold to the complainant and provided sufficient time to redeem the pledged gold. But the complainant did not comply the terms and conditions of the gold loan ; that the relief sought by the complainant for handing over the pledged gold to the complainant is not sustainable as the pledged gold has  been sold in auction vide auction dated 16.6.2016 and the remaining balance which is Rs. 909/- is sent to the complainant through cheque No. 621947 dated 15.7.2016. On merits it was submitted that  complainant has approached the opposite party on 30.6.2015  and has availed a gold loan of Rs. 14000/- from the opposite party after pledging his gold chain weighing 8.3 gms vide pledge No. 0110950700006778 and the due date of the pledge was 25.3.2016. While taking the gold loan, the complainant has signed the loan documents after going through the same and without any pressured  and with his own free will and consent in which opposite party has categorically stated that complainant has to pay the interest within 270 days and also to pay the principal amount on or before due date. The complainant was also informed that if the complainant fails to deposit the interest, then the opposite party has every right to sold the pledged gold ornaments in auction. But the complainant has failed to pay the interest as well as principal amount. The complainant has never approached the opposite party to return the principal amount alongwith interest. The complainant has himself admitted that he has approached the opposite party in April 2016 i.e. after the expiry of the due date which is 25.3.2016 and during the loan period neither the principal amount nor the interest has been paid by the complainant to the opposite party. Rather the opposite party always tried to  contact the complainant for payment through telephonically but the complainant has delayed the matter. Finally the opposite party vide its letter dated 2.4.2016 has informed the complainant that the pledged gold would be auctioned on 2.5.2016 , but the complainant has not approached the opposite party for payment. The auction detail is also published in newspaper namely Indian Express dated 9.5.2016 and finally auction was done on 16.6.2016. After the auction of the pledged gold, opposite party has adjusted the auction amount with his principal loan amount and interest which was due towards the complainant i.e. Rs. 18,074/-, however the auction was closed at Rs. 19023/- and surplus amount i.e. Rs. 949/- was paid  after deduction the postal charges i.e. Rs. 40/-  and final balance amount of Rs. 909/- was paid to the complainant through cheque No. 621947 dated 15.7.2016, whereas the complainant has filed the present complaint on 8.8.2016 . While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.

3.       In his bid to prove the case  Sh.Sanjeet Singh,Adv.counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence duly sworn affidavit of the complainant Ex.C-1, copy of receipt dated 30.6.2015, copy of legal notice dated 23.6.2016 Ex.C-3, copy of track detail Ex.C-4 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.

4.       To rebut the aforesaid evidence Sh.Rajat Anand,Adv.counsel for the opposite party tendered into evidence duly sworn affidavit of Sh. Girish Narain Singh, authorized signatory Ex.OPW1 alongwith documents Ex.OP1 to Ex.OP18/1 and closed the evidence on behalf of the opposite party.

5.       Ld.counsel for the complainant has reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint and has vehemently contended that complainant approached the opposite party on 30.6.2015 for getting personal loan by way of pledging the gold jewellery. At that time on the requirement of the opposite party, the complainant pledged jewellery  for  obtaining a personal loan and on return of the entire loan amount including interest amount without any default,  the opposite would hand over the pledged jewellery  items to the owner/complainant. As such on the  assurance of the opposite party the complainant pledged a gold chain of net weight of 8.30 gm and its price comes to Rs. 30000/-. The opposite party assured the complainant that after receiving the entire principal alongwith interest upto date, the opposite party will release the pledged gold chain to the complainant. In the month of April 2016 the complainant approached the opposite party to return the entire loan amount of Rs. 17033/- i.e. Rs. 14000/- plus interest amounts which comes to Rs. 3033/-  and requested the opposite party to release the pledged gold chain to the complainant. But the opposite party put off the matter on one pretext or the other . In the month of June 6,2016, the opposite party refused to hand over the chain to the complainant . The complainant approached the opposite party many a times and also issued legal notice to the opposite party on 27.6.2016 vide speed post No. EP383492215IN delivered on 28.6.2016 for release of pledged  gold chain for which also the opposite party have neither returned the pledged gold chain nor gave any reply to the complainant. Ld.counsel for the complainant contended that all this amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

6.       On the other hand ld.counsel for the opposite party has repelled the aforesaid contention of the ld.counsel for the complainant and has vehemently contended that complainant has approached the opposite party on 30.6.2015  and has availed a gold loan of Rs. 14000/- from the opposite party after pledging his gold chain weighing 8.3 gms vide pledge No. 0110950700006778 and the due date of the pledge was 25.3.2016. While taking the gold loan, the complainant has signed the loan documents after going through the same . It was submitted that complainant has to pay the interest within 270 days and also to pay the principal amount on or before due date. The complainant was also informed that if the complainant fails to deposit the interest, then the opposite party has every right to sold the pledged gold ornaments in auction. It was further submitted that complainant has failed to pay the interest as well as principal amount and the complainant never approached the opposite party to return the principal amount alongwith interest.  It was the admitted case of the complainant that he approached the opposite party in April 2016 i.e. after the expiry of the due date which is 25.3.2016 . It was submitted that the opposite party always tried to  contact the complainant for payment through telephonically but the complainant has delayed the matter. Finally the opposite party vide its letter dated 2.4.2016 has informed the complainant that the pledged gold would be auctioned on 2.5.2016 , but the complainant has not approached the opposite party for payment. The auction detail is also published in newspaper namely Indian Express dated 9.5.2016 and finally auction was done on 16.6.2016. After the auction of the pledged gold, opposite party has adjusted the auction amount with his principal loan amount and interest which was due towards the complainant i.e. Rs. 18,074/-, however the auction was closed at Rs. 19023/- and surplus amount i.e. Rs. 949/- was paid  after deduction the postal charges i.e. Rs. 40/-  and final balance amount of Rs. 909/- was paid to the complainant through cheque No. 621947 dated 15.7.2016. Ld.counsel for the opposite party has submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.

7.       But, however, from the appreciation of the facts and circumstances of the case, it becomes evident that on 30.6.2015 the complainant availed loan  to the tune of Rs. 14000/- for 270 days after pledging gold chain weighing 8.30 gm. It was the case of the complainant that when in the month of April 2016 complainant approached the opposite party to return the entire loan amount of Rs. 17033/- and also demanded the pledged gold chain from the opposite party, the opposite party  put off the matter on one pretext or the other. Finally in the month of 6,2016 the opposite party refused to hand over the said chain to the complainant. On the other hand it was the admitted case of the opposite party that complainant availed loan amount to the tune of Rs. 14000/-  on 30.6.2015  and pledged gold chain weighing 8.3 gm vide pledge No. 0110950700006778 with due date of payment as 25.3.2016. However, the complainant did not turn up to return the principal amount alongwith interest. As such when the complainant did not approach the opposite party after a lapse of period of one year for return of principal amount alongwith interest despite making so many telephonic calls to him, the opposite party sent a notice to auction department  for the auction of the pledged items vide pledge No. 0110950700006778, copy of notice is Ex.OP4 on record. The complainant was also served with auction notice, copy of the same is Ex.OP3 on record . The opposite party also got published the detail of auction in the newspaper dated 9.5.2016 of Indian Express, copies of which are Ex.OP7 & Ex.OP8. As such after taking all the steps of auction, the auction was done on 16.6.2016. The opposite party has adjusted the auction amount with his principal amount alongwith interest  which was due towards the complainant i.e. Rs. 18074/-. However, the auction was closed at Rs. 19023/, as per action detail , copy of which is Ex.OP2 on record. As such the surplus amount of Rs. 909/- was paid  to the complainant through cheque No. 621947 dated 15.7.2016, copy of which is Ex.OP15 on record, copy of acknowledgement is Ex.OP16 and copy of postal receipt is Ex.OP17 on record. The complainant has not produced any evidence that after receipt of loan amount, he ever approached the opposite party for the repayment of the loan amount. However, it was the admitted case of the complainant that the complainant  approached the opposite party for return of the entire loan amount in the month of April 2016 i.e. after expiry of the period for payment of the loan amount which was 25.3.2016. As such the opposite party is within its right to do the needful to recover the entire loan amount after a lapse of a period of one year which  the opposite party has done after adopting all the legal procedure i.e. by giving auction notice in the newspaper as well as by informing the complainant well in time. As such the opposite party has acted the entire process as per agreement executed between the parties  and this Forum is of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

8.       In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, there is no merit in the  complaint and the same is dismissed. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 23.8.2017