| Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PATIALA. Consumer Complaint No. 459 of 19.11.2019 Decided on: 16.6.2021 Gurmail Singh aged about 61 years son of Sh.Baru Singh, resident of Chhajla Road, Aulakh Patti, Nilowal,Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur-148028. …………...Complainant Versus Aadhar Housing Finance Limited, B-17/423, 2nd Floor, above Indian Bank, Opp. Polo Ground, Near Modi College Chowk, Lower Mall, Patiala-147001. …………Opposite Party Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. QUORUM Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President Sh.Y.S.Matta, Member ARGUED BY Sh.Kulwant Singh, counsel for complainant. Opposite party ex-parte. ORDER JASJIT SINGH BHINDER,PRESIDENT - This is the complaint filed by Gurmail Singh (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against Aadhar Housing Finance Ltd.(hereinafter referred to as the OP/s) under the Consumer Protection Act,1986(hereinafter referred to as the Act)
- Briefly the case of the complainant is that the complainant is a ex-service man having retired from Indian Army. It is averred that the complainant applied for housing loan from the OP which was sanctioned to the tune of Rs.11,46,637/- on 13.8.2018 for a period of 12 years to be repaid @ 7.8% per annum interest as agreed between the parties. It is further averred that the complainant has a plot measuring 1000 Sq.yards in the name of his wife and son on which he wanted to construct a house. It is further averred that the agents of the OPs visited the complainant at his house and assured him for the advancement of house loan to the tune of Rs.15,00,000/- @7.8% per annum interest. Thereafter the OPs after going through the documents supplied by the complainant sanctioned house loan of Rs.11,46,637/-on 13.8.2018 to be disbursed to the complainant in three installments i.e. two of 30% and one of 40%.
- It is further averred that the OPs took Rs.3000/- on 8.6.2018 as processing fee and Rs.20,886/-on 16.8.2018 as processing fee and GST but the OP disbursed only Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant on 13.9.2018 through cheque No.053524 and credited in the account of the complainant. The complainant requested the OP for the disbursement of the remaining amount of 30% i.e. Rs.3,43,991/-but the OP refused to disburse the remaining amount. Not only this the OPs directed the complainant to repay the loan amount in installments of Rs.2600/-per month. It is further averred that the complainant requested the OP for the statement of loan account, which the OP supplied on the payment of Rs.800/- on 25.9.2019.After going through the loan account statement the complainant shocked that his loan account was debited for Rs.7505/- and Rs.1,39,132/- on 16.8.2018 but this amount was never given to the complainant and also the rate of interest was mentioned as 12.50% on 13.8.2018, 12.75% on 1.11.2018 and 13% on 1.8.2019 whereas the same was agreed as 7.8% between the parties. Not only this the OP also charged Rs.3500/- and Rs.1000/-as charges of late payment of installments whereas the same were paid in time. Therefore, fraud has been committed by the OP as the loan account of the complainant debited only Rs.1,00,000/- and the OP has received Rs.23,886/- from the complainant as processing fee for sanctioning of loan amount and more than Rs.30,000/- in the shape of installments. It is further averred that the complainant is ready to repay the balance amount of loan actually taken by him i.e. approximately Rs.50,000/-with interest @7.8% per annum. There is thus deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP which caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant. Hence this complaint with the prayer to accept the complaint by giving direction to the OP to settle the account of the complainant as the complainant has received Rs.1,00,000/- from the OP as loan and an amount of Rs.1,46,637/- to be deducted from the loan account of the complainant and rate of interest be imposed @ 7.8% per annum. The OP may also be directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation and Rs.15000/-towards the costs of litigation.
- Notice sent to the OP was duly served but it did not come present and was accordingly proceeded against ex-parte.
- In support of the complaint, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C3 and has closed the evidence.
- We have heard the ld. counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
- The ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant had applied for house loan and the loan of Rs.11,46,637/- was sanctioned as per the terms and conditions. The ld. counsel further argued that the complainant has got a plot measuring 1000 sq. yards situated at near Tibbi Aulakh Patti, cross the drain near Nilowal, Sunam.The ld. counsel further argued that the OP assured to sanction the loan of Rs.15lac to him and they have sanctioned loan of Rs.11,46,637/-to him. The ld. counsel further argued that the OP has charged Rs.3000/- on 8.6.2018 as processing fee and Rs.20886/-16.8.2018 as processing fee and GST and the OP has disbursed the loan of Rs.1lac only. The ld. counsel further argued that the complainant requested for the disbursement of the first installment of Rs.3,43,991/- but they have not given the loan. The ld. counsel further argued that the OP illegally debited the amount of Rs.1,46,337/- and the complaint be allowed.
- To prove this case, the complainant Gurmail Singh has tendered his affidavit, Ex.CA and he has deposed as per his complaint;Ex.C1 is the document of Aadhar Housing Finance Ltd. in the name of Gurmail Singh,Surinder Pal Kaur and Satnam Singh in which customer number and loan application number is mentioned. It is accompanied by transaction detail,Ex.C2 is bank statement of Gurmail Singh of SBOI, Ex.C3 is the Aadhar card of Gurmail Singh.
- By going through the document and by going through the pleadings, it is stated by the complainant hat he has applied for housing loan of Rs.11,46,637/-on 13.8.2018 and this loan was repayable in 12 years @ 7.8% per annum interest as agreed by the OP.It is further pleaded that the OP assured that the loan of Rs.15lac will be given but the OP has disbursed only loan of Rs.1lac and the remaining loan was never sanctioned. The complainant has pleaded that he has returned Rs.1,46,637/- to the OP in lieu of the sanctioned loan of Rs.1lac.
- There is no document on the file which can show that the loan of Rs.11,46,637/- was sanctioned. There is also no document on the file which can show that OP has assured loan of Rs.15lac @ 7.8% per annum interest to the complainant. It is for the OP to see by giving through the documents that whether they are to give loan to their client or not. OP cannot be forced to give loan to the customer. If the OP has taken more amount in lieu of Rs.1lac from the complainant then the complainant has to file a civil suit for recovery before the Ld. Civil Court and recovery of any excess amount cannot be ordered by this commission.
- So due to our above discussion, the OP cannot be forced to give loan to the complainant. It is upon the OP to see the credential of the complainant as to whether he has to be disbursed home loan amount of Rs.15lac or not. So the complaint is dismissed. Parties are to bear their own costs.
ANNOUNCED DATED:16.6.2021 Y.S.Matta Jasjit Singh Bhinder Member President | |
