Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/303/2019

Dr. Rachna Arora - Complainant(s)

Versus

Axis Bank Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Ranjan Arora

25 May 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/303/2019
Date of Institution	:	30.4.2019
Date of Decision	:	25.5.2023

 

Dr. Rachna Arora, wife of Dr. Ashish Puri D/o Shri H.C. Lal Aroa, presently resident of H. No.95, Sector 9, Panchkula (Haryana)-134109.

Second Address:

C/o flat No.106, Block-B, First floor, Regalia Towers, Dhakauli, near Gurudwara Baouli Sahib, Zirakpur, District Mohali, Punjab 160104.

.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

1. Axis Bank Ltd., through its Managing Director-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Registered office: “Trishul”, 3^rd floor, Opp. Samartheshwar Temple, Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad (Gujrat) -380006.

2. The Managing Director-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Axis Bank Ltd. Registered office: “Trishul”, 3^rd floor,   Opp. Samartheshwar Temple, Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) 380006.

3. Ms. Megha alias Kamalpreet Ahluwaia, The Centre operations Head-cum-Manager, Axis bank Ltd., Retail Asset Centre (RAC), SCO No.s 350-352, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh.

 .  … Opposite Parties

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                       

ARGUED BY		Sh. Ranjan Arora counsel for complainant.
		Sh. Ammish Goel, counsel for OPs.

Per SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, Member

1. Briefly stated the complainant availed home loan of Rs.14,25,00/- from the OPs bank, which was got foreclosed by the complainant on 5.5.2017 by depositing the balance amount of Rs.3,48,765/-. Earlier also an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- was also deposited by the complainant on 22.3.2017 but the same was credited to the loan account on 3.4.2017 though the complainant was having sufficient funds in his account.  Further an amount of  Rs.7,20,000/- was deposited by the complainant on 16.2.2017  towards the part payment of the loan in question but again the same was credited in the loan account of the complainant on 21.2.2017 though there were sufficient funds in the account of the complainant.  The allegation of the complainant is that despite the fact that he deposited  the amount of Rs.3,48,765/-  with the OPs on 2.5.2017 for foreclosure of loan but the same was shown as received on 5.5.2017 and credit in loan account on 18.5.2017 despite sufficient fund in the account of the complainant and  thereby the OPs  illegally deducted EMI of Rs.6,199/- on 10.5.2017. Even earlier on 10.4.2017 an amount of Rs.6.199/- was also deducted as EMI instead of Rs.4,614/-  being revised EMI after part pre-payment of the loan. The excess amount of Rs.1,585/- was not refunded by the OPs. It is alleged that despite of payment of loan in full and final the property documents and cheques  and NOC was not issued by the OPs.  The OPs were requested several times to redress the grievance of the complainant and even legal notice was sent but to no avail. Alleging the aforesaid act of Opposite Parties deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part, this complaint has been filed
2. The Opposite Parties  in their reply while admitting the factual matrix of the case stated that the due date of installment of the loan was 10^th of every month whereas the complainant deposited  an amount of Rs.3,48,765/- in her account on 4.5.2017  which was credited to her account on 8.5.2017, however, by that time the account had not been closed by the OPs as per stand (Turn Around Time) TAT and the due installments had  automatically deducted from the account of the complainant. But when the OPs realized that the account of the complainant had already been closed by paying full and final amount, excess amount deducted by the OPs was credited back in the account of the complainant with immediate effect. Even earlier also the due amount of
   Rs.6,199/- was deducted from the account of the complainant on 10.4.2017. It is denied that EMI of Rs.6,199/-  was reduced to Rs.4,614/-. Immediately after closure of loan account in question  letter of release of equitable mortgage  and No Objection Certificate  was issued in favour of the complainant on 12.9.2017 which also included original documents which was handed over to the him.. However, despite several requests to collect the blank cheques, the complainant did not turn up to collect the same and the Ops are ready to handover the same as and when he approaches for the said purpose. All other allegations made in the complaint has been denied being wrong.
3. Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated
4. Contesting parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and gone through the record of the case.
6. On perusal of complaint it is observed that the main grievance of the complainant is that in spite of depositing of amounts in his loan account, the same was not credited by the OPs either on same day or next day of clearance rather due to delayed crediting of amount by OPs the complainant had to pay more interest and also the OPs have failed to give NOC and have failed to return the cheques duly signed by the complainant, which were in possession of the OPs in spite of payment of full loan amount.
7.  The stand taken by the OPs is that they have a cut off date every month for the amount to be deposited and the same could not be accounted and loan amount could not be reduced while admitting the fact of having received the amount earlier than the cut off date every month.
8. On perusal of documents  on record it is observed that the amount of Rs.1,20,000/- was paid on 22.3.2017 but the same was adjusted on 3.4.2017 after delay. Similarly the amount of 7,20,000/- paid on 16.2.2017 and was adjusted on 21.2.2017 after a delay 5 days. Similarly, an amount of Rs.3,48,765/- was deposited on 2.5.2017 but credited on 18.5.2017.
9. It is also an admitted fact by the OPs that the blank cheques duly signed by the complainant are still in their possession.
10. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we are of the concerted view that by delay in accounting of the deposited amount and non return of the duly signed blank cheques even after payment of full loan amount, the OPs have indulged in unfair trade practice and are deficient in providing service which led  the complainant to run from pillar to post and finally approach to this Commission for redressal of his grievance.
11. In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint partly succeeds and the same is accordingly partly allowed. OPs are directed as under:-

1. To issue  NOC to the complainant if already not issued in respect of the loan in question  alongwith all the blank cheques/documents  taken from him at the time of sanction of loan.
2. To issue a fresh statement of loan account by accounting of deposited amount from the next date of deposits  and refund the excess amount so worked out with interest @9% p.a.  from the date of filing of the complaint till realization.
3. To pay compensation of Rs.25000/- for  causing mental agony and harassment to him;
4. to pay 10000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

12.      This order be complied with by the OPs within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(ii) & (iii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(i)&(iv) above.
13.      Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

			sd/- [Pawanjit Singh]
			President
			Sd/-
			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
mp			Member