| Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PATIALA. Consumer Complaint No. 417 of 16.10.2018 Decided on: 1.4.2021 Harmesh Kumar son of Gopal Chand, resident of H.No.241, Chajju Majri, Word No.5, Rajpura District Patiala. …………...Complainant Versus Bajaj Finance Limited 12-a, Ist Floor, Caliber Market, Near HDFC Bank, Rajpura, District Patiala. …………Opposite Party Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. QUORUM Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President Sh.Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member Sh.Y.S.Matta, Member ARGUED BY Ms.Sumanpreet Aulakh,counsel for complainant. Sh.Gaurav Singla, counsel for OP. ORDER JASJIT SINGH BHINDER,PRESIDENT - This is the complaint filed by Harmesh Kumar (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against Bajaj Finance Ltd.(hereinafter referred to as the OP/s) under the Consumer Protection Act.
Facts of the complaint - Briefly the case of the complainant is that he is the resident of Rajpura and is working in Reliance Store at Rajpura. It is averred that he purchased a mobile phone make Samsung J-7 Prime 32 for Rs.15,900/-on 21.9.2017 from Reliance Retail Ltd. and got financed the same from Bajaj Finance Ltd. vide loan agreement No.5L4CDDC57462402 dated 23.10.2017 and had repaid the said amount through installments as a result of which NOC dated 12.9.2018 was issued.
- It is averred that on 22.11.2017 OP passed a new loan of Rs.15,900/- in the name of the complainant without his consent and in the month of April,2018 deducted Rs.2650/- from his account as an EMI of the fake loan. It is averred that the complainant forwarded certain e-mails regarding fake loan and auto deduction of the EMIs from his bank account but the OP did not give any reply and kept on deducting the EMIs from the bank account of the complainant.
- On the back ground of these facts the complainant has filed this complaint with the prayer to accept the same by giving direction to the OPs to pay compensation of Rs.70,000/- for causing mental agony, pain and harassment and alongwith litigation expenses of Rs.30,000/-.
Written Statement - Notice of the complaint was duly served upon the OP who appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply having raised preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable. It is pleaded that Bajaj Finance Ltd. is a Non Banking Finance Company registered with RBI and also registered under the Companies Act,1956 and is a loan giving company to the customers. The OP further raised the objection that the complaint is totally frivolous, baseless and flagrant abuse of process of law and deserves to the dismissed.
- On merits, it is submitted that as per the details provided by the Reliance Retail Ltd., the OP released the payment to it and when the complainant raised the issue before the OP then it send an e-mail to Reliance Retail Ltd. as it had received two times amount of loan as per the information provided by them. Further it is submitted that the amount was refunded to the complainant forthwith when it received reply from the Reliance Retails Ltd. and he has concealed this fact from the OP. Therefore, as the complainant has received the amount from the OP, there is no locus standi for the complainant to file the present complaint .The OP after denying all other averments made in the complaint has prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
-
- 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 C4 and closed the evidence.
- On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OP has tendered in evidence Ex.OPA affidavit of Ms.Shivani Garg, Asstt.Manager, Legal Collectios alongwith documents Exs.OP1 to OP2 and closed the evidence.
-
- We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
- The ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant is an employee of Reliance Store, Rajpura and he had purchased mobile Samsung J-7 for Rs.15900/- on 21.9.2017 from Reliance Retail Ltd. on loan from Bajaj Finance. The ld. counsel further argued that the complainant has paid all the installments of this loan and NOC was issued .The ld. counsel further argued that on 22.11.2017, the OP passed a new loan of Rs.15900/- in the name of the complainant without any consent of the complainant in the month of April/2018 and Rs.2650/- was deducted from the account of the complainant as EMI of the fake loan. The ld. counsel further argued that the complainant sent certain e-mail to know about the fake loan and the reason of auto deduction of EMI from his bank account but the same was never replied as no loan was opted so he be compensated.
- On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OP has argued that as per the detail provided by Reliance Retail Ltd. the payment has been released by the OP to Reliance Retail Ltd. and when the complainant raised issue before the OP, the OP sent the e-mail to Reliance Retail Ltd. regarding the issue raised by the customer that he has received two times amount of loan as per the information .The ld. counsel further argued that the OP never indulged in mall practice and there was delay on the part of Reliance Retail Ltd. in reverting on the issue as raised by the customer. The ld. counsel further argued that the amount has been refunded to the complainant and now nothing is due and the complaint be dismissed.
- To prove the case Sh.Harmesh Kumar has tendered his affidavit, Ex.CA and he has deposed as per the complaint,Ex.C1 is the receipt of purchase of mobile phone, Ex.C2 is document of Bajaj Finance Limited, in which it is mentioned that Bajaj Finance has received complete payment from the consumer and there is no further amount outstanding and payable by the consumer to Bajaj Finance Ltd.,Ex.C3 is statement of account,Ex.C4 is e-mail regarding two times money deduction issue.
- On behalf of the OP Shivani Garg has tendered her affidavit, Ex.OPA and she has deposed as per the written statement.In para No.7, it is mentioned that the Bajaj Finance as soon as the Bajaj Finance has found its mistake the amount was returned to the complainant forthwith and received reply from Reliance Retail Ltd., Ex.OP1 is statement of account,Ex.OP2 is statement of account.
- So by going through the pleadings and the written statement, it is clear that Sh.Harmesh Kumar who is working at Reliance Store, Rajpura has purchased the mobile phone Samsung J-7 vide receipt,Ex.C1 on finance from the OP for Rs.15900.It is also admitted fact that the complainant had paid all the dues and no objection certificate,Ex.C2 issued by the OP is on the file. In the month of April/2018 an amount of Rs.2650/- was again deducted from the account of the complainant as an EMI when nothing was due towards him. By going through the written statement, in para No.7, it is stated that it was found that the amount was wrongly recovered from the complainant and the same was refunded to the complainant forthwith and the company received reply from the Reliance Retail. So by going through the written statement of the OP and the affidavit filed by the authorized signatory, it is clear that the complainant has cleared all the loan amount and NOC Ex.C2 was issued. Despite the fact that Rs.2650/-was again deducted on account of some new loan which was never taken by the complainant from the OP. Although the amount was refunded to the complainant but definitely he had made to suffer from mental agony and harassment without his fault due to creation of 2nd loan and deduction of EMI from his account. So due to ill act of the OP the complainant is to be compensated. Accordingly complaint stands partly allowed and amount of Rs.10,000/- is awarded as compensation alongwith Rs.5000/-as costs of litigation. Compliance of the order be made by the OP within a period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of this order.
ANNOUNCED DATED:1.4.2021 Y.S.Matta Vinod Kumar Gulati Jasjit Singh Bhinder Member Member President | |
