Date of filing : 19-12-2017
Date of order : 27-09-2018
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.245/2017
Dated this, the 27th day of September 2018
PRESENT:
SRI.ROY PAUL : PRESIDENT
SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL : MEMBER
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M. : MEMBER
Dr.Zakaria.k
S/o Baduvan Kunhi Haji
Indira Nagar Housing Colony : Complainant
Chengala (P.O),kasaragod
(Adv: K.K.Muhammed Shafi,Kasaragod)
1. Bajaj Finance Limited Registered office
At Mumbai-Pune Road,Akurdi,Pune-411035
Maharashtra
Represented by chief manager
2. Bajaj Finserv Limited
1stFloor,Chandrabagi Above Yes Bank
Pillayar Kovil Road, Opposite to Kavitha Theatre,
Kannur-670002 .Represented by Manager
3. Bajaj finserv limited
4th Floor,Raj Towers Balmatta Road
Opposite to Hotel Roopa Manglore,
Karnataka-575001 Represented by Manager : Opposite parties
4. Vijaya Bank
Kasaragod Branch,
Ground Floor, Tiger Hill Building Kasargod-671121
Represented by its Manager
O R D E R
SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL: MEMBER
The gist of the complainant’s case is that he is a medical practitioner by profession and availed ‘doctors loans’ from the opposite parties No 1, opposite party No 2 & 3 are branch offices functioning under opposite party No 1 with a rate of interest of 15.85% per annum. Loan was for Rs. 20, 46,000/- dated 08-01-2015 with an EMI of Rs.49, 592/-. They above loan is availed through opposite party No 3 on the basis of agreement. Another loan availed by the complainant was for an amount of Rs. 9,67,285/- with a rate of interest of 15% per annum on 28-01-2016 and the loan duration is 3years EMI was fixed as Rs. 33,531/- through opposite party No 2. The above loan amount was credited by the opposite party No 3 and 2 directly to account of complaint maintained with opposite party No 4 Vijaya bank who is the banker of the complainant. The complainant paid loan installment to the opposite party No 2&3 through opposite party No 4. The cheqeus for the clearance of the above 2 loan availed by the complainant is issued from the HDFC Ltd Kanhangad Branch. After availing loan the complainant observed the rate of interest charged for the above loans are far high comparing with the other banks and other financial institutions. So it has been decided to close the loan as earliest as possible and the matter was discussed with HDFC Ltd Kanhangad and they agreed to sanction with lower rate of interest of 11%. Accordingly HDFC issued cheques to the Bajaj Finance to clear the loan such as cheque dated 30/07/2016 for an amount of Rs.17,35,105/- , cheque dated 30/07/2016 for an amount of Rs.2,71,298/-, cheque dated 30/07/2016 for an amount of Rs 5,71000/-. Through these cheque complainant appropriated to settle the loan amount. The complaints submit that the amount collected by opposite party No 2 and No 3 is in excess of the amount actually due to them. HDFC issued the above cheques incorporating the figure to the opposite party No 2 and No 3 on furnishing of the closing loan figures by them. It was not brought out to the complainant since the figure was informed to him orally. Therefore the complainant came to know the excessive amount only later.
Accordingly above 2 loan stands pre closed it is the terms of the agreement that foreclosure charges shall not be levied. But it is found that the foreclosure amount is charged. The opposite party No 3 collected the excess amount against the banking principle as Rs.1, 44,306/- as far as loan no 4220DLO7216294. As far as loan No 5950DL19211085 is concerned is very meager amount which is waived by opposite party No 2. But after the settlement the complainant noticed that opposite party No 2 still collecting the amount from complainants account towards the above second loan. An amount of Rs.1, 79,520/- was collected for 16 months (16 x 11220).
The opposite party No 2 and No 3 also collected Rs99,393/- from the complainant under various unwarranted heads . The complainant noticed collection of excess amount as well as the withdrawal at the time of account verification and on obtaining the statement from the opposite party No 2 for the auditing purpose. Immediately complainant contacted opposite party No2 and 3 over telephone and via Email on 27/10/2017. The opposite party No 3 is responded with a reply by stating that they would refund Rs.53,379/- but said amount was not refunded so far as the service entered by the opposite party No 1, 2 and 3 is deficient which is against the banking norms. The complainant suffered monetary loss, mental agony and distress. Hence the complaint.
The notice to the opposite parties was duly served on them but they failed to appear before the Forum.
The complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination And Ext A1 to A11 were already marked on his side. The Forum perused the documents analyzed evidence.
The main grievance of the compliant case is that the opposite party No 1 to 3 collected excess amount from his account and also collected pre closure charges against the agreement made between the complainant and opposite party No 1 to 3. The complainant availed 2 loans as ‘doctors loan’ from opposite party No 1 with a rate of interest 15.85% per annum for an amount of Rs.20,46000/- loan duration was for 5 years and EMI was Rs. 49,592/- on the basis of an agreement dated 31/12/2014 is marked as Ext A1. The statement of account to the above loan is marked as Ext A2. The copy of agreement for the second loan is marked as Ext A3 and the statement of loan account is marked as Ext A4. The complainant paid the installment to opposite party No 2 and 3 through opposite party No 4. The cheques of the clearance of the above loan availed by the complainant issued from HDFC Kanhangad .
After availing loan the compliant observed that the rate of interest charged for the loans are high comparing with the other banks. So he decided to close loan and the matter had been discussed with HDFC Ltd Kanhangad Branch and sanctioned the required amount with a lower rate of interest as 11% per annum. Accordingly HDFC Bank issued a cheque for Rs. 17, 35,105/-, 2, 71,298/- , 5, 71,000/- to opposite party No 3 dated 30/07/2016. The first cheque appropriated to settle the first loan and the 2 and 3 cheque utilized to settle 2nd loan. Ext A5 is the letter issued by the HDFC for the issuance of the cheques mentioned above. But it is pertinent to note that the amount collected by opposite party No 2 and 3 is in excess of the amount due to them by in co-operating the figure as stated by the opposite party No 2 and 3. Moreover foreclosure charges also levied against the loan agreement entered between the parties. The opposite party No 3 collected excess amount by opposite party No 3 opposed to law and banking principle. Transparency is to be maintained by the bank. After settlement, to utter dismay and desperation the complainant came to know that opposite party No 2 is still collecting the amount from his account. Opposite party No 2 and 3 also collected Rs.99,393/- under various unwarranted heads. After closing the amount only on 25/10/2017 the complainant verified his account for auditing purpose came to know about the unfair trade practice followed by the opposite parties. Immediately he contacted opposite party No 2 and 3 over telephone and via E mail dated 27/10/2017 for which opposite party No 3 sent a reply which is marked as Ext A6 by promising that they would refund Rs.53,379/- to the complainant and also the foreclosure amount . But that has been not done so far. Ext A7 to A9 are the E- mail communication send to opposite party No 1 to 3. Ext A10 is the office copy of the letter sent by the complainant to Vijaya Bank and statement of account issued by opposite party No 4 is marked as Ext A11. Upon scrutinizing all the documents we are of the opinion that the complainant was subjected to monetary loss and hardship damages due to the unfair trade practice rendered by opposite party No 1 to 3. Therefore the complainant is entitled for necessary relief from us. There is no contra-evidence adduced by opposite parties even after proper service of notice from the Forum.
As per the order I.A329/17 dated 19/12/2017 this Forum had restrained opposite party No.4 from disbursing any amount towards the loan installments from the account of the complainant. But it is evident that the opposite party No. 4 has conspicuously violated the order of this Forum in I.A.329/17. So we hold that in the best interest of Justice, and as a corrective steps to protect the decorum and dignity of the court, it is ordered to remit a fine amount of Rs.5000/- by opposite party 4 before this Fora as the legal Aid fund within 30 days of service of this order.
In the result the complaint is allowed and the opposite parties No 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay an amount of Rs.1,44,306/-( as per schedule A), Rs 1,79,520/-( As per Schedule C),Rs.99,393/- ( As per Schedule D) to the complainant. The opposite parties No 1 to 3 are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation with a cost of Rs.3000/- to the complainant. Time for compliance is 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1.31.12.2014 Copy of the agreement of Loan Account
A2.25-10-2017 Statement of loan issued by the opposite party No.3
A3.26-01-2016 copy of the agreement of Loan Account
A4.25-10-2017 Statement of loan issued by the opposite party No 2
A5.27-11-2017 Letter issued by HDFC Ltd, Kanhangad Branch
A6.30-1017 Letter sent by the opposite party No.3
A7.24-10-2017 copy of E-mail letter sent by the complainant to the opposite party No 1to 3
A8.27-10-2017 copy of E-mail letter sent by the complainant to the opposite party No 1to 3
A9.17-11-2017 copy of E-mail letter sent by the complainant to the opposite party No 1to 3
A10.27-10-2017 Office copy of the letter sent by the complainant to the Vijaya Bank, kasargod Branch.
A11.15-12-2017 D.D towards the court fee of Vijaya Bank,Kasaragod Branch.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Senior Superintendent
Ps/
