| Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area (Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi- 110016 Case No.346/2017 Rajni Kapoor W/o Shri Gian Vir Kapoor Both R/o House No.C-234 Greater Kailash Part-I New Delhi-110048 ….Complainant Versus M/s Arvee Sales J-15, Central Market Lajpat Nagar-II New Delhi-110024 Bajaj Finance Ltd. Regd. Office Mumbai Pune Road, Akurdi Pune-411035 Maharashtra ….Opposite Parties Date of Institution : 27.09.2017 Date of Order : 09.12.2022 Coram: Ms. Monika A Srivastava, President Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member ORDER Member: Ms. Kiran Kaushal - Complainant alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice has prayed for directions to OPs to refund the premium amount of insurance policy i.e. Rs.9,962/- It is also prayed that OP be directed to pay interest on the excess amount from the date of filing of the claim and compensation for mental agony, harassment and litigation charges.
- Complainant purchased two Godrej Air Conditioners from M/s Arvee Sales(OP-1)on 06.04.2016 for Rs.64,000/-. Complainant paid Rs.12,800/- in cash and for payment of the remaining amount of Rs.51,200/-, EMI amount of Rs.3,823/- + Rs.3,823/- which equals to Rs.7,646/- was fixed per month with zero percent interest from Bajaj Finance Ltd.(OP-2). It is next stated that fist two installments of Rs.7,646/- were deducted from the savings bank account of the complainant on 05.05.2016. Thereafter, OP deducted ten installments amounting to Rs.61,168/- and the date of last installment was 17.04.2017. Thereby OP collected Rs.61,168/- through ECS debits from 05.05.2016 to 17.04.2017 by means of ten installments from the saving account of the complainant.
- As per the complainant balance amount to be paid in installments was Rs.51,200/- whereas OP-2 deducted excess amount of Rs.9,968/- from complainant’s account. Complainant sought refund of the excess amount, however, when the excess amount was not refunded despite requests, Complainant approached this Commission for redressal of her grievance.
- OP resisted the complaint stating inter-alia that the Complainant purchased two products from OP-1 and availed the two loans from
OP-2.
Details of the two loans are as under- Loan Amount No: | Loan Amount Financed | EMI | Tenure | Balance as on date | 4010CD21316119 | 32000/- | 3200/- | 10 months | Closed | 4010CD21350998 | 32000/- | 3200/- | 10 months | Closed |
- It is submitted that EMI’s which were getting deducted towards both the loan accounts are Rs.6,400/- in total i.e. Rs.3,200/- towards each loan availed by the Complainant. Complainant’s allegation that the EMI’s which were getting deducted from her account is Rs.3,823/- is contradictory to the statement of account.
- It is next stated that the Complainant insured his ACs vide loan Account No. 401EWC21316130 for an amount of Rs.4,981/- dated 09.04.2016. It is stated that the insurance availed by the Complainant is an FOS based issuance wherein Complainant opts for insurance in front of FOS in the dealer shop while purchasing products. It is also stated that the signatures made in the insurance enrollment form and KYC documents are done by the Complainant only. It is further submitted that complainant signed all the documents pertaining to the said loan and insurance after she and her husband read the documents. Copy of the same is appended at Page No. 19 with WS of OP-2. Thus an amount of Rs.4,981/- was deducted/charged from the complainant against insurance.
- Denying the allegations in the instant complaint, OP-2 prays for dismissal of the complaint with the exemplary cost.
- Rejoinder is filed by the complainant wherein it is stated that the loan agreement/credit facility consisted of fixed set of papers which was asked to be signed by the complainant on the places ticked by OP. Signatures of the complainant were obtained without showing the contents of the form. It is stated that OP-2 concealed the fact about issuance of insurance policy while granting credit facility. It is denied that complainant has given her consent for purchase of the insurance. It is further stated that OP-2 had deducted Rs.9,968/- for issuance of insurance policies. It is when the complainant filed a complaint before the District Commission OP-2 returned the amount of Rs.4,984/- which was credited in the complainant’s saving bank account at Punjab & Sindh Bank, which proves the malafide intention of
OP-2. Statement of account of the Complainant is marked as Mark-A with the rejoinder.
- Respective evidence and written submissions on behalf of parties are filed. Material placed on record is perused. Submissions made on behalf of the Complainant and OP-2 is heard.
- It is Complainant’s case that he had purchased two Godrej Air Conditioners by making cash payment of Rs.12,800/- and the remaining amount of Rs.51,200/- was to be paid in installments to OP-2, wherein the EMI amount was fixed at Rs.7,646/- per month with zero percent interest. Perusal of the statement of account of the Complainant reveals that on several occasions Rs.3,823/- has been deducted from the Complainant’s account towards EMI. The said loan accounts of the Complainant have been closed and the Complainant alleges that excess of Rs.9,962/- were deducted from her account by OP-2.
- Complainant’s plea, that she was not consulted/told about the insurance policy for extended warranty, is rejected. It is seen from the documents placed by OP-2 with the WS that the proposal form for Insurance is duly signed by the Complainant. The maxim of ‘JAGO GRAHAK JAGO’ is apt in the instant case, as the Complainant claims to have signed on the dotted lines without reading/understanding the terms & conditions and without realizing that she was signing on the insurance policy. Be as it may, having signed on the proposal form of the Insurance Policy, Complainant is now bound by the terms of the contract.
- As per the proposal form Complainant was to pay total premium of Rs.4,981/- but OP-2 deducted Rs.9,968/- from the complainant’s account. It is brought to the notice of this Commission that OP-2 credited Rs.4,984/- to the account of the Complainant without assigning any reason for returning the said amount.
- We hold OP-2 guilty for charging excess amount of Rs.4,984/- from the Complainant and returning the same after the complaint was filed before this Commission. The request for refund of excess money fell on deaf ears and it is only when the Complainant filed a complaint before this Commission that the refund was given to the Complainant without assigning any reason.
- We are of the opinion that OP-2 indulged in unfair trade practice therefore, OP-2 is directed to pay Rs.20,000/- for unfair trade practice and towards compensation to the complainant for harassment alongwith litigation cost. The said amount be paid by OP-2 within 03 months from the date of order, failing which OP-2 shall pay Rs.20,000/- @8% p.a till realization.
File be consigned to the record room and order be uploaded on the website. | |
