Need help under cp act
ksvrajuadv
(Querist) 21 April 2013
This query is : Resolved
If a person applied for loan,and company after issuing offer letter or approval letter and guide him to paid processing fee Rs 25,000/,and Rs 3500/ for file chages,and other hidden charges,after paying all this company declined loan on the ground that gurantor is Schedule caste person & as per co. rules S.C not to permitted to become gurantor,and in other case same company denied loan on the ground that gurantor 's pay is less than EMI of principal.I want to know that is this case fall under Consumer Protection Act or not ? Secondly company denied loan on illegal & arbitrary grounds,can any criminal or civil action may be brought aganist such company ? Company comitted fraud to 10 persons and all are gave POA to a person who was agent of company but this agent refund some sort of money to every person,even company commited fraud to its agent,company's head office at U.P and cause of action arisen in Punjab where was agent's office,but now there is no business between agent and company and agent is paying balance amount because consumers were provided by him and above all his friends.Now POA holder want to file case in Punjab,wheather jurisdiction arise in Punjab or not ? Plz send ur reply for my every enquiry.Thanks in advance
Nadeem Qureshi
(Expert) 21 April 2013
Dear Mithali
first of all this is against the public policy or it is comes under the Discrimination.
Untouchability shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law.
Section 7 in The Protection Of Civil Rights Act, 1955 7. Punishment for other offences arising out of" untouchability". (1) Whoever- (a) prevents any person from exercising any right accruing to him by reason of the abolition of" untouchability" under article 17 of the Constitution; or (b) molests, injures, annoys, obstructs or causes or attempts to cause obstruction to any person in the exercise of any such right or molests, injures, annoys or boycotts any person by reason of his having exercised any such right; or (c) by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, incites or encourages any person or class of persons or the public generally to practise" untouchability" in any form whatsoever; 2[ or] (d) 2[ insults or attempts to insult, on the ground of" untouchability", a member of a Scheduled Caste;] 3[ shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term of not less than one month and not more than six months and also with fine which shall be not less than one hundred rupees and not more than five hundred rupees]. 4[ Explanation 1].- A person shall be deemed to boycott another person
course of business; or (b) abstains from such social, professional or business relations as he would ordinarily maintain with such other person.
1. Subs. by Act 106 of 1976, s. 8, for certain words (w. e. f. 19- 11- 1976 ).
2. Ins. by s. 9, ibid. (w. e. f. 19- 11- 1976 ).
3. Subs. by s. 9, ibid., for certain words (w. e. f. 19- 11- 1976 ).
4. Renumbered by s. 9, ibid. (w. e. f. 19- 11- 1976 ).
Explanation II.- For the purpose of clause (c) a person shall be deemed to incite or encourage the practice of" untouchability"- (i) if he, directly or indirectly, preaches" untouchability" or its practice in any form; or (ii) if he justifies, whether on historical, philosophical or religious grounds or on the ground of any tradition of the caste system or on any other ground, the practice of" untouchability" in any form.] (1A) 1[ Whoever commits any offence against the person or property of any individual as a repraisal or revenge for his having exercised any right accruing to him by reason of the abolition of" untouchability" under article 17 of the Constitution, shall, where the offence is punishable with imprisonment
term exceeding two years, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years and also with fine.] (2) Whoever- (i) denies to any person belonging to his community or any section thereof any right or privilege to which such person would be entitled as a member of such community or section, or (ii) takes any part in the ex- communication of such person, on the ground that such person has refused to practise" untouchability" or that such person has done any act in furtherance of the objects of this Act, 2[ [ shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term of not less than one month and not more than six months, and also with fine which shall be not less than one hundred rupees and not more than five hundred rupees.
Second this is a consumer court case and the person who pay the amount is a consumer.
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 21 April 2013
no more to add.
ksvrajuadv
(Querist) 22 April 2013
Thanks Nadeem Sir.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 23 April 2013
The co. does not have then right to charge
fees 28500/=00 which it should return to applicant seeking loan if co. has NOT kept informed applicant before that any S.C. would not stand surety.
The Co.'s such decision is a discrimination
or not would be a matter of long debate for which no adequate facts are available here.
However it does not attract"untouchability"
For discrimination we need to examine laws at every state level which check on rights of free transfer of these S.C..
The purpose of security gets frustrated,the moment transferability of surety gets checked by some statute book in name of benevolence.If S.C. are minors in view of the states ,others can not be compelled to deal with these minors unless states sponsor and ensure recovery of debts advanced to them.
