IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI.

Present: Hon’ble THIRU JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH, PRESIDENT F.A. No. 284 of 2023 [Against the order passed in C.C. No.3 of 2022 dated 30.12.2022 on the file of the D.C.D.R.C., Salem]

Tuesday, the 31^st day of December 2024 The Manager IDBI Bank, Salem Branch KT Towers, Four Roads Omalur Main Road Salem- 636 007. .. Appellant/

Opposite party - Vs -

K. Vengatraman

1/169-2, Velampalayam Road Kakkaveri PO Rasipuram Taluk Namakkal- 637 408. .. Respondent /

Complainant Counsel for Appellant/Opposite Party :M/s.Shivakumar & Suresh Counsel for the Respondent/Complainant : M/s. N. Suresh [No representation]

This appeal came up for final hearing on 13.12.2024 and, on hearing the arguments of the counsel for the appellant and on perusing the material records, this Commission made the following

O R D E R

R.SUBBIAH J., PRESIDENT This appeal has been filed by the opposite party, under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 as against the order dated 30.12.2022, in C.C. No.3 of 2022, by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Salem, allowing the complaint filed by the respondent, in part.

2. The appellant is the Opposite Party and the respondent is the complainant before the District Commission. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be referred as per their ranking before the District Commission.

3. In brief, the case of the complainant, as given in the complaint filed before the District Forum, is as follows :-

The complainant had pledged 652.7 gms., of gold ornaments on 04.11.2015 with the opposite party Bank and obtained loan amount of Rs.9,76,000/- under Agri Gold Loan, for meeting out his agricultural development expenses. Subsequently, on 02.11.2016, the said loan was closed by the complainant by paying the entire loan amount. Due to hike of gold price, again the complainant availed Agri Gold Loan by re-pledging 551.6 gms. of gold ornaments on 02.11.2016 with the opposite party Bank and obtained a loan amount of Rs.9,89,000/- under A/c No. 0211671100108232 for meeting out his agricultural development expenses. Whileso, on 07.11.2017 the opposite party had issued a Demand Notice, demanding the complainant to repay the said gold loan along with interest. In the notice it is stated, “You are therefore requested to pay the amount and release the gold jewels”, i.e., to redeem the jewels after paying the loan amounts and if the loan amount is not paid within the due date i.e., on 01.11.2017, 2% penalty will be collected on the outstanding amount. The due amount would be recovered from the Savings Bank Account and the lien would be marked in the said SB Account. Immediately the complainant approached the opposite party with a request to settle the gold loan along with interest as claimed in the demand notice dated 07.11.2017 but the bank officials did not comply with the request of the complainant, to release the gold even on full payment. Hence, the complainant issued a letter on 23.12.2017 to the opposite party and to the Zonal Head, IDBI Chennai inclusive of Regional Office and requested to return back the jewels on receipt of the entire amount for the gold loan. The speed post was duly served to the Zonal Head IDBI Chennai on 27.12.2017 but the request made by the complainant was not considered by the opposite party. Instead of considering the request of the complainant, the opposite party Bank published a loan auction notice on 25.01.2018. In the said notice it has been stated that the auction would be held on 30.01.2018. Hence, once again the complainant made a request in person, for redemption of the gold jewels, which was also not considered by the opposite party Bank. In the notice dated 07.11.2017 and the newspaper publication dated 25.01.2018, the defaulters of the gold loan have been directed to settle the loan amount with interest and redeem the jewels. The complainant was always ready and willing to settle the jewel loan and redeem the gold jewels.