Date of filing: 21-10-2016 Date of order : 04-8-2017
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::
KADAPA Y.S.R DISTRICT
PRESENT SRI V.C. GUNNAIAH, B.Com., M.L., PRESIDENT
SMT. K. SIREESHA, B.L., LADY MEMBER
Friday, 04th day of August 2017
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 82 / 2016
Putta Ramalinga Reddy, S/o P. Sidda Reddy,
age 65 years, H.I.G. 324, Sir Thomas Munroe Township,
(Singapore Township), Near RIMS,
Kadapa, A.P. ………… Complainant.
Vs.
The Branch Manager, SBI, Duvuru,
Kadapa District. ….. Opposite party.
This complaint coming for final hearing on 21-7-2017 in the presence of Complainant as in persona and Sri T.V.S.S. Murthy, Advocate for Opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-
O R D E R
(Per V.C. Gunnaiah, President),
1. The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 (for short herein after called as C.P. Act) praying this forum to direct the Opposite party to pay cost of gold of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Gold gross weight 163.85) or to return gold, to pay Rs. 1,50,000/- for physical and mental agony, to pay Rs. 5,000/- for corresponding of notices and Rs. 6,000/- for costs.
2. The averments of the complaint in brevity are as follows:- The Complainant obtained agricultural gold loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- on 11-8-2012 from Opposite party and deposited gold ornaments i.e. one Vaddanam with cheap stones, one Neklace with cheap stones and one lady bracelet with cheap stones totaling gross weight 163.85 gms and net weight is 150 gms. At the time of availing of loan he was told that the loan is valid for 3 years and should be repaid by 11-8-2015. To repay the loan he went to the bank, but he was informed by the opposite party that gold ornaments has been auctioned on 29-9-2015 and they served the auction notice in Eenadu Telugu newspaper on 6-9-2015 and by auctioning the gold Rs. 3,50,000/- came and the same was credited to his account and the balance has been paid to him. He questioned the Branch Manager as to how he could go to the public auction without serving the notice or informing him, though he was updated his residential address regularly. The opposite party informed that there was huge amount of loans inadequate staff and pressure from superiors and they could not communicate and he would ask his superiors to compensate for the damage / loss. But there was no reply though waited for long time. The Complainant sent a complaint dt. 12-2-2016 to the opposite party to explain the wrong on his part but no reply was given. On 22-12-2015 he submitted a complaint to the Regional Branch at Kadapa but he also not replied and was postponing and said that he would seek an explanation from opposite party. But there was no reply at all.
3. Subsequently, the Complainant approached Banking Ombudsmen at Hyderabad and filed a complaint on 10-8-2016 in complaint No. 201611009000779 and the ombudsmen held the complaint required detailed investigation and consideration of elaborate evidence, beyond the scope of ombudsman. The opposite party though says that they have sent a letter through Professional courier and that it seems to be fabricated and that the Complainant has not received a single letter from the opposite party. The gold deposited with the bank has a special emotional attachment with him. Hence, the complaint for the above reliefs.
4. Opposite party filed counter / written version denying the allegations stating that the complaint is not maintainable and Complainant is put to strict proof of all the allegations. It is further averred the Complainant who is resident of Sir Thomas Munroe Township, Near RIMS, Kadapa obtained agricultural gold loan from opposite party bank for an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- on 11-8-2012 by depositing gold ornaments gross weight of 163.85 gms. and net weight of 150 gms. stating that the same is for purpose of agriculture and agri allied activities that were to be carried out in Duvvur Mandal of YSR District by furnishing Xerox copy of pattadar passbook which does not stand in his name. At the time of obtaining loan Complainant was informed that the said loan will become NPA after 3 years and that he has to renew the loan by paying the necessary interest there on every year and should clear the loan within 3 years. As per SBI norms and guidelines of RBI and if he failed to comply the bank rules will sell the gold in public auction by publishing the date of auction in Local Telugu daily news paper. Inspite of intimating the same through a letter by courier dt. 29-7-2015 finally by publishing the open auction general notice in Eenadu, Telugu Daily news paper 6-9-2015, as the Complainant became defaulter in renewing the loan every year, this O.P. bank auctioned the gold transparently towards gold loan on 15-9-2015.
5. It is further averred the Complainant has given false certifications and declarations and documents to the bank with an intention to avail agriculture loan debt waiver and willfully defaulted the loan by cheating the bank and Government in the name of Agriculture. The Complainant is residing at Kadapa city which is far away of 70 kilometers and it seems he is not aware of auction publication published in Local Telugu Daily Newspaper which is largest circulated Telugu Daily News paper as per Press council of India information. Opposite party bank followed due procedure and guidelines and terms and conditions of gold loan as per the bank and RBI rules and followed the rules and regulations and there was no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party bank at any time. The Complainant being an educated person intentionally suppressed the facts and misguided the bank and obtained agriculture loan for unlawful gain and filed this present complaint, though there was no fault on the part of the O.P. bank. Hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed with exemplary costs.
6. On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for determination.
- Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of Opposite party as pleaded by the Complainant?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for return of gold ornaments or its value and other reliefs from Opposite party as prayed for?
- To what relief?
7. No oral evidence has been let in by the parties, but on behalf of Complainant Exs. A1 to A11 are marked and on behalf of Opposite party Exs. B1 to B8 documents are marked. The Complainant and opposite party filed written arguments.
8. Heard arguments on both sides and perused the pleadings, documents, written arguments filed by both parties carefully.
9. Point Nos. I & II these two points are connected to each other. Hence, they have been taken up for discussion together for inconvenience sake and to give findings.
10. Complainant in person contended that he is not a defaulter in paying gold loan transaction and he was never informed about auction of his gold ornaments and when he approached to pay the loan amount on 12-10-2015, he was told that the gold deposited by him was auctioned on 29-9-2015 but he had not received any letter of auctioning the gold. Therefore, there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and he proved the same by filing Ex. A1 to A11. Therefore, he is entitled for the reliefs.
11. Per contra learned counsel for opposite party contended that the Complainant is well educated and he played fraud on the bank and obtained agricultural loan by depositing gold on showing the passbook of others and misguided the bank and he failed to renew the loan by paying interest from year to year from 11-8-2012 and inspite of notice and publication in Eenadu newspaper about gold auction, the Complainant had not turned up and not responded and after following due procedure by opposite party auctioned the gold ornaments on 29-9-2015 and credited the same to his account and no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party bank. Hence, the Complainant is not entitled for the reliefs and the complaint is liable to be dismissed. 12. After going through the record carefully and considering the submissions made by the Complainant and opposite party we find much force in the contention of opposite party to dismiss the complaint by holding that no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and Complainant is not entitled for the reliefs claimed.
13. It is the case of Complainant that the period of gold loan is three years from 11-8-2012 and it is to be repaid by 11-8-2015. But on 15-9-2015 the gold ornaments was auctioned without notice, therefore, there is deficiency in service. As per contention of opposite party, the gold loan should be repaid within one year from 11-8-2015 or to renew it by paying interest year to year.
14. A perusal of documents filed Complainant under Exs. A1 to A11 do not disclose that at any point after availing gold loan the Complainant approached the opposite party bank authorities either to repay the loan or to pay interest yearly and renewed the gold loan account as per guidelines of opposite party bank and RBI. Even, as per version of the Complainant, he approached opposite party to repay the loan amount on 12-10-2015 only by which date the gold ornaments were auctioned by opposite party and credited the amount to his account. Ex. B4 is the copy of auction notice dt. 29-7-2015. The said notice clearly goes to show that the Complainant was informed about auction of the gold deposited by him as he failed to discharge the loan. Ex. B5 is the proof of delivery of notice to Complainant. Ex. B1 is the copy of Eenadu Telugu daily news paper dt. 6-9-2015 regarding notification of auction of gold ornaments on 15-9-2015 and requested the debtors including the Complainant to pay loan amount and redeem the gold ornaments, lest they will be auctioned in the bank premises on 15-9-2015. Ex. B1 is the wide publication to the general public as well as the Complainant and other debtors about the auction of the gold deposited in the bank. Therefore, it cannot be said that the auction of Complainant’s gold articles were auctioned without notice to the Complainant and not following due procedure by the bank. If really the Complainant had an interest in paying the loan amount and redeem the gold ornaments deposited by him, he would have approached the bank in time before open auction and cleared the loan account and redeem his gold articles. As the Complainant loan account has became NPA, the Opposite party bank has resorted for auction of the gold as per norms of the bank and RBI guidelines and auctioned the gold ornaments and credited the auctioned amount to his account. Therefore, we do not see any merit in the complaint as pleaded by the Complainant that there is deficiency in service on the part of Opposite party in auctioning his gold ornaments and he is entitled for costs of gold and compensation for mental agony and costs etc. Thus we hold no deficiency in service by opposite party as pleaded and Complainant is not entitled for any reliefs from the opposite party and complaint is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, points I & II are answered against the Complainant.
15. Point No. III. In the result, the complaint is dismissed, but in the circumstances without costs.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, this the 04th day of August 2017
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined.
For Complainant: NIL For Opposite party : NIL
Exhibits marked for Complainant : -
Ex.A1 P/c of gold deposited particulars dt 11-8-2012 issued by the respondent..
Ex.A2 P/c of letter issued by the complainant to The Branch Manager, SBI, Duvuru, dt 07-11-2015..
Ex.A3 Copy of legal notice to The Branch Manager, SBI, Duvuru, dt 05-06-2016
& 29-06-2016..
Ex.A4 Copy of legal notice of respondent counsel to Sri M. Narendranath Reddy, Advocate, dt. 20-6-2016.
Ex.A5 P/c of the Banking Ombudsman (A.P & Telangana) complaint No. 201617009000779, dt. 10-8-2016.
Ex.A6 Copy of E-manual on loan and advances on Gold / Silder Ornaments page No. 209, 210 para 1.14, 1.15.1, 1.15.2.
Ex.A7 Copy of consignor copy.
Ex.A8 Copy of postal ledger of SBI and consigner copy of handwriting verification and for insertions.
Ex.A9 Copy of application to S.B.I, under RTI Act.
Ex.A10 Copy of receipts and daily delivery run sheet issued by professional courier service.
Ex.A11 Copy of pattadar passbook of Complainant.
Exhibits marked on behalf of the Opposite party: -
Ex.B1 Copy of Eenadu Telugu daily news paper dt.06-09-2015 filed by Respondent.
Ex.B2 P/c of Statement of account of the complainant.
Ex.B3 P/c of Extract of Gold loan Auctioned ledger.
Ex.B4 P/c of Auction notice dated 29-07-2015.
Ex.B5 P/c of Courier proof of Delivery vide No.PDT504697.
Ex.B6 P/c of State Bank of India Postage Book vide No. 186.
Ex. B7 P/c of reply notice dt. 20-6-2016.
Ex. B8 P/c of application cum appraisal for loan against Gold ornaments.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Copy to :-
1) Putta Ramalinga Reddy, S/o P. Sidda Reddy, age 65 years, H.I.G. 324, Sir Thomas Munroe Township, (Singapore Township), Near RIMS, Kadapa, A.P.
2) Sri T.V.S.S. Murthy, Advocate for opposite party.
B.V.P
