The Navhind Times Archive

Complaint against Marcel Urban dismissed

 By Adv. Jatin Ramaiya

Aruna Mohandas Phadte, approached the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Porvorim alleging deficiency in service by the Marcel Urban Co-operative Credit Society. However her complaint was dismissed due to lack of supporting documents.

As per the case,  Phadte said that she had obtained loan of Rs three lakh  repayable on February 17 2017 in 84 installments of Rs 55,000 and further the loan was to be deducted from her salary.

It was Phadte’s case that loan installments were paid regularly. The complainant claimed the credit society unfairly deducted extra amount of  Rs 45,348 and also charged an amount of Rs 8575- towards dividend and therefore she was constrained to file a complaint before the consumer forum.

The full bench on perusal of the complaint and hearing Mohandas Phadte the husband of the complainant observed that “We find that the complainant has not produced the relevant documents such as copy of the loan agreement, documents to show charging of Rs 8,575 towards dividend. Neither any document to show that the loan amount is fully repaid or closed have been submitted.”

Furthermore, the Forum whilst relying on the Regulation 7 (2) of the Consumer Regulations, 2005 observed that aforesaid regulation provides that every complaint shall clearly contain particulars of dispute and the relief claimed and shall also be accompanied by copies of such documents as are necessary to prove the claim as made in the complaint, which according to Members of the Forum was absent in the complaint before them. Therefore, Members of the Forum were not inclined to admit the complaint matter and accordingly dismissed the same.

Share this article if you wish