Raipur Division Life Insurance Employees Cooperative Societies Limited & 2 Ors vs Sandhya Gupta

This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner, Raipur Division Life Insurance Employees Cooperative Societies Ltd. & Ors. against the order dated 22.11.2016 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chhattisgarh (in short 'the State Commission') passed in First Appeal No.2016/477.

Brief facts of the case are that complainant/ respondent is a member of the petitioner society and applied for loan of Rs.10,00,000/- from the petitioner society disclosing her son's education as purpose of loan. The loan was sanctioned by the petitioner society. However, Rs.3,00,000/- was disbursed to the respondent and the remaining amount of Rs.6,89,750/- was put in a fixed deposit in the name of the respondent. A legal notice was sent by the respondent to disburse the remaining amount so that loan can be utilised for the medical needs of the petitioner, which were pressing at that time. The petitioner society did not disburse the remaining amount and therefore, the respondent filed a consumer complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (in short 'the District Forum') and the District Forum allowed the complaint vide its order dated 05.07.2016 as under:-

"10. Therefore on the basis of the above complete investigation we accept the complaint filed by the complainant partially and order that the respondent jointly or severally within month of the date of the order:-

a) Will pay to the complainant Rs.6,89,750/- the loan amount deposit in the fixed deposit with interest.

b) Will pay to the complainant Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the mental harassment cause due to the above act.

c) Will pay to the complainant Rs.5,000/- as cost of litigation and advocate fees."

Aggrieved by the above order of the District Forum, the petitioners herein/opposite parties preferred an appeal before the State Commission and the State Commission vide its order dated 22.11.2016 dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the District Forum. Hence, the present revision petition.

Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that in the application form the purpose of loan was shown as son's education and marriage. Though the loan was sanctioned, amount of Rs.3,00,000/- was actually disbursed to the complainant. The remaining amount was got fixed deposited in the name of the complainant and the same was to be released when the complainant provided the proof of marriage i.e. invitation card. The complainant never provided invitation card and therefore, the fixed deposit was not released though the complainant was earning interest on this fixed deposit. It was further contended by the learned counsel that though the loan application was made for son's education and marriage, in the legal notice given to the petitioners/opposite parties, it was stated that the remaining amount of loan was required for medical treatment of the loanee as she was suffering from serious disease. As the loan was not sanctioned for medical purpose, the fixed deposit was not released to the complainant. At the last, the learned counsel stated that the society is ready to release the fixed deposit to the complainant along with interest accrued provided the complainant files an application for need of the remaining amount for medical purpose and it was further prayed that as the petitioner society was not deficient in any way as the total amount of loan was sanctioned, the compensation of Rs.50,000/- and cost of Rs.5,000/- as awarded by the District Forum be set aside.

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent/complainant stated that the loan was sought only for son's education and somebody in the society itself has made overwriting in the application form to include the 'marriage' also. Thus, there was no question of providing any invitation card. There should be no requirement of fresh application for release of remaining amount on medical ground as the loan was already sanctioned and the complainant has already written in the legal notice that she requires remaining loan amount for her treatment. The District Forum has awarded a compensation of Rs.50,000/- and cost of Rs.5000/- to the complainant because the District Forum has clearly found that petitioners/opposite parties were deficient in service.

I have considered the arguments of both the learned counsel and have examined the material on record. There is no doubt that the application of loan was made atleast for son's education even if the element of marriage is left. The respondent was entitled to get the loan amount. The situation was complicated by the legal notice sent by the complainant wherein the remaining amount was sought for medical treatment, though the loan was not sanctioned for medical treatment. As the remaining amount of loan was got fixed by the petitioners in the name of the complainant, it cannot be said that the petitioners involved in any unfair trade practice or were deficient in their services. As the complainant had given revised application claiming the loan amount for medical purpose, the petitioners were justified in not releasing the remaining amount for medical purpose. The only deficiency on the part of the petitioners seems to be that when the earlier released amount of Rs.3,00,000/- was repaid, why did the petitioners not release the total or in part the remaining amount of loan for the original purpose of respondent's son's education.

Without going into other details, it seems that both the parties have been negligent in one way or the other and hence, I deem it appropriate to modify the order of the District Forum in respect of the compensation, of Rs.50,000/-. It is now ordered that the petitioner society shall pay a compensation of only Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand only) to the respondent/complainant instead of Rs.50,000/- allowed by the District Forum. The remaining order of the District Forum is upheld. Order of the State Commission shall also stand modified accordingly. Order of the District Forum as modified by this order be complied with within a period of 45 days from the date of this order, failing which, the petitioner society shall pay an additional interest @3%p.a. on the remaining loan amount of Rs.6,89,750/- from the date of this order till actual payment.