CO-OPERATIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT BANK vs V PERINBANAYAGAM

THE opposite party in O. P. 48/2002 on the file of District Forum, Nagercoil is the appellant herein.

IT is not necessary to go into great details as to the facts of the case. Suffice it to say that the grievance of the complainant against the opposite party was that the opposite party in respect of the loan sanctioned to the complainant, had not furnished proper accounts and further had not secured the subsidy for purchasing Auto Rickshaw by the complainant. The complainant had borrowed Rs. 40,800 from the opposite party on 3. 9. 1995 for purchasing a load auto to be run by him for his livelihood. According to him the various amounts paid by him had not been credited in his account and the passbook which was handed over to the Opposite party to make entries. The four items, in respect of which, according to the complainant, he had made payments and the same had not been reflected in the accounts, are as follows : Rs. 250 paid on 27. 2. 1997 covered by Ex. A2 receipt is not found in Ex. A1 with the statement of account. He had paid Rs. 400 on 16. 5. 1997, Ex. A3 being the copy of the receipt given by the opposite party, Rs. 117 had been credited to and the balance of Rs. 283 had not been credited in the account of the complainant. Again, under the original of Ex. A4, dated 25. 9. 1997, the complainant had paid Rs. 500. This had not been credited in his account. He had paid Rs. 1,000 covered by the original of Ex. A6 receipt on 19. 4. 2000. Only Rs. 978 had been credited. On 30. 6. 2001, under the original receipt of Ex. A7, he had paid Rs. 20,000. But only Rs. 19,574 were credited in his account. So also another amount of Rs. 721 had been paid by the complainant on 24. 9. 1998. This amount had not at all been credited in his account. Thus, a total sum of Rs. 2,202 had not been credited in his account. The District Forum directed the opposite party to furnish an up-to-date statement of account to the complainant and the District Forum also directed the opposite party to pay Rs. 2,202 with compensation of Rs. 3,000 and costs of Rs. 1,000 to the complainant.

Before us, the statement of account has been filed by the opposite party. All the accounts in respect of which, the complainant had expressed his grievance are all reflected in this statement. The entire total amount is found accounted for. The various amounts relate to the insurance paid by the opposite party on behalf of the complainant and also the expenses for registered notices. These details ought to have been furnished to the complainant by the opposite party even before the complainant went to the Consumer Forum. This, they had not done. Again, atleast before the District Forum, the opposite party should have furnished the details. This also, the opposite party did not do. As already noted, before us, the statement of account has been furnished. No doubt, we find from the statement that all the amounts have been properly accounted for. However, that by itself, does not absolve the opposite party of its obligation towards the complainant.

IN such circumstances, we pass the following order. The amount of Rs. 2,202 directed to be paid by the opposite party to the complainant need not be paid by the opposite party. With regard to the compensation of Rs. 3,000, we feel that it is on the high side and we reduce it to Rs. 1,500. In other respects, the order of the District Forum shall stand. The appeal shall stand partly allowed as indicated above. There will be no order as to the costs in the appeal. Appeal partly allowed.