STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                                    U.T., CHANDIGARH 

                                    (Additional Bench)

1.  Amarjit Singh son of Sh.Natha Singh, resident of House No.669,    H/1, Ranjit Nagar, Sector 11, Kharar, Mohali.

(Email id:-amarjitsingh_1971@yahoo.co.in, Mob.No.97810-04007)

2.  Mrs.Jagjit Kaur wife of Sh.Amarjit Singh, resident of House No.669, H/1, Ranjit Nagar, Sector 11, Kharar, Mohali.   

                                                                             … Appellants

V E R S U S

      1.  Bajaj Housing Finance Ltd., Corporate Office, 4th Floor, Bajaj Finserv Corporate Office, Off Pune Ahmedabad Road, Viman Nagar, Pune 411014, Maharashtra through its Managing Director.

    2nd Address:-

Cerebrum IT Park, B2 Building, 5th Floor, Kumar city,    Kalyani               Nagar, Pune 411014, Maharashtra

Registered Office:- Mumbai-Pune Road, Akrudi, Pune 411035,   Maharashtra

(Email Id. bfflgrievance@bajajfinserv.in)

 2.   Bajaj Housing Finance Ltd., Branch Office SCO No.57-59,    1st and 2nd Floor, Sector 17-A, Opposite Hotel Taj, Chandigarh through its Branch Manager.

          (Email Id:-wecare@bajajfinserv.in)

  3.    Mr.Karan Manchanda, officer/Dealing Head, Branch Office,  SCO 57-59, 1st & 2nd Floor, Sector 17-A, Opposite Hotel Taj, Chandigarh.(Mobile No.8427691119)

     4.        Sh.Sanjiv, Assistant, Branch Office, SCO 57-59, 1st & 2nd Floor, Sector 17-A, Opposite Hotel Taj, Chandigarh (Mob.No.8360039275).

                                                                        ..... Respondents

Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against order dated 27.09.2022 passed by       District       Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh in Consumer Complaint No.102/2020.

BEFORE:       MRS. PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER

                       Mr.PREETINDER SINGH,MEMBER

Argued by:      Sh.Inderdeep Singh,  Advocate for the  appellants .

                         Sh.Hitender Kansal ,  Advocate for the respondents.

 PER PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER

                   This appeal is directed against the order dated 27.09.2022, rendered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred as “the Ld. Lower Commission”), vide which, it partly allowed the complaint. The operative part of the impugned order reads as under ;

“Taking into consideration the above discussion and findings, we partly allow the present complaint with direction to the OPs to refund excess interest amount of Rs.5243/- to the complainant, along with compository   amount of Rs.5000/- towards compensation for harassment & agony as well as litigation costs.  

                           This order shall be complied with by OPs within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which they shall be liable to pay additional cost of Rs.10,000/-, apart from above relief.”        

2.       Before the Ld. Lower Commission, it was case of the complainants/appellants  that  they  availed home loan from LIC Housing Corporation and subsequently got their Home Loan shifted from LIC Housing Corporation to Bajaj Housing Finance Ltd/OP Company on the allurements of getting benefits manifold than being offered by LIC Housing Corporation such as less interest rate and also to get benefit of Pradhan Mantri Awaas Yojna (PMAY) to the tune of Rs.2.35 lacs.  Accordingly, the complainants being allured by the benefits, got sanctioned  from the Bajaj Housing Finance Ltd. two loan accounts of Rs.9 lacs and Rs.6.54 lacs respectively at the rate of interest of 8.95% p.a. and 9.95% p.a. respectively vide letters dated 25.10.2018 (Annexure C-3 to C-6) .  It is stated that the complainants noticed that the OPs instead of charging agreed rate of  interest @ 8.95% p.a. were charging  @9.05 p.a. and in this manner charged excess amount of Rs.5243/- towards interest   from 5.4.2019 to 5.10.2019. The complainants  sent an email dated 29.7.2019 requesting OPs No.1 & 2 to correct the anomaly and in reply  the OPs vide email dated 19.9.2019 (Annexure C-18) intimated that rate of interest has been reduced to 8.60% p.a. and 9.30% p.a. in respect of  two loan accounts of the complainants.  It was further averred that  on 23.9.20219 when the complainants sent email (C-15) to OPs enquiring about processing of his case under Pradhan Mantri Awaas Yojna, it was replied vide email dated 30.9.2019 (C-16) that complainants’ case, being transfer case, is not covered under the said scheme.  According to the complainants, the primary reason of transfer of loan account to OPs was that it was ensured to get the benefit of said scheme to the complainants . It was stated  that the persons who  have availed loan facility from one PLI/Bank /financial institution and  taken benefit of  interest subvention scheme under  the  Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojra  and thereafter transferred his/her loan account from first/earlier PLI/Bankl/Financial Institution to other PLI/Bank/financial institution are not eligible  for the interest subventions scheme as per clause 5.11 of the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yoja. (Annexure C-17). The complainants served a legal notice to the OPs asking them to reconcile the accounts and refund the excess amount charged by them, but to no avail.  Hence, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs, a consumer complaint was filed before the Ld. Lower Commission seeking refund of excess amount of  Rs.5243/-  charged from 5.4.2019 to 5.10.2019; directions to the OPs to process their case under Pardhan Mantri Awas Yojna, as assured by the OPs,   along with interest and  compensation for mental agony and physical harassment as well as litigation expenses.

3.                    Pursuant to issuance of notice, Opposite Parties/respondents   appeared before the Ld. District Commission and contested the case. In their written version,  while admitting the factual matrix of the case, the OPs stated that the complainants have two loan accounts with the OPs and grant of relief of rendition of account in relation to transaction with OPs is not maintainable before this Commission.  It was further  stated that the complainants themselves approached the OPs for availing financial facility of balance transfer of existing loan as well as extension of loan, which were provided by OPs No.1 & 2. It was further stated  that the complainants have taken two loans from answering OPs   for   Rs.9 lacs and another for Rs.6,54,000/- and the rate of interest agreed between the parties  was @8.95% p.a. & 9.95% p.a. respectively at the time of loan. However,  later on the said rate of interest changed to   @8.60% and 9.30% respectively, as per the guidelines of RBI,  so there is no  question of charging excess interest rate.  It was further stated that  the Pardhan Mantri Awaas Yojana was provided for economic weaker sections, lower income groups  and further it was to be  provided to such  family who should not own pucca house either in his/her name or in the name of any other family members, whereas the complainants were not entitled under the said scheme as they were already owner of Property No.669/4/1 Khata No.1472/1588, Khasra No.38//11/3/1, 20 situated at Kharar badbas No.184, SAS Nagar Mohali and in the said property the complainants took a loan of Rs.11 lacs from LIC Housing Finance Limited on 6.2.2010 which was later on paid by the complainants on 27.11.2018 by paying an amount of Rs.8,86,650/- which was borrowed by the complainants from answering OPs.  Denying all other allegations, it was pleaded that there was no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and a prayer was made for  dismissal of the complaint. 

4.                  On appraisal of the complaint, and the evidence adduced on record, Ld. Lower Commission party allowed the complaint, as stated in the earlier part of the order.  

5.               Still dissatisfied with the  aforesaid order passed by the Ld. Lower Commission, the instant Appeal  has been filed by the Appellants/complainants  for modification of the order and grant of relief, as prayed for in the complaint.   

6.                  We have heard Counsel for the parties, and have gone through the evidence and record of the case with utmost care and circumspection.

7.                  In the appeal, the ground taken by the appellants is that the Ld. Lower Commission has not considered the case of the appellants under Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna and disallowed the relief on the ground that the appellants have not impleaded Ministry of Housing & Urban Poverty Alleviation, Government of India as party to the present complaint, whereas no such objection was taken by the respondents, thus, the finding of  Ld. District Commission is beyond pleading which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. According to Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna, it was for the respondents to implement the said policy by themselves. It was further stated that the grounds taken by the respondents that it was a case of transfer of housing loan and further the said policy was for Economic Weaker Section and Lower Income Groups are not applicable in the case of the appellants.  According to the appellants, persons who are not eligible for Interest Subvention Scheme under Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna are those persons who have availed loan facility from one PLI/Bank/Financial institution and have taken benefit of interest subvention scheme under PMAY and thereafter transferred his/her loan account to other financial institution but the appellants have not availed such facility from the from LIC Housing Corporation from whom loan was taken. The learned Counsel for the respondents contended that the order passed by the Ld. Lower Commission is quite reasonable and further stated that new scheme Annexure A/3 attached with the appeal is the amendment of earlier scheme and still the appellants are not eligible as they have not applied for the same to the competent authority.

8.                  The main grievance of the appellants before the Ld. Lower Commission was for charging excess amount of Rs.5243/- charged by the respondents during the period 54.2019 to 5.10.2019 and the other was for considering their case under the Pradhan Mandri Awas Yojna (PMAY). Alongwith the appeal, the appellants have attached PMAY-Urban  scheme (Annexure A-3), according to which they fall under Credit Linked Subsidy Scheme under the head of Middle Income Group-I. The said Credit Linked Subsidy Scheme (CLSS) is reproduced as under ;

                 (ii) Credit Linked Subsidy Scheme(CLSS)

 “Beneficiaries of Economically Waker Section (EWS)/Low Income Group(LIG), Middle Income Group(MIG-I) and Middle Income Group (MIG) II seeking housing loans from banks, housing Finance companies and other such institutions for acquiring new construction or enhancement of house are eligible for an interest subsidy of 6.5% , 4% and 3% on loan amount upto Rs.6 Lakh, Rs.9 Lakh and Rs.12 Lakh respectively. The Ministry has designated Housing and Urban Development Corporation (HUDCO), National Housing Bank(NHB) and State Bank of India(SBI) as Central Nodal Agencies (CNAs) to channelize this subsidy to the beneficiaries through lending institutions and for monitoring the progress. The scheme for MIG category has been extended upto 31^st March,2021.”

9.              From the above, it is clear that the concerned Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MOHUA) of the Govt. of India has designated Housing and Urban Development Corporation (HUDCO), National Housing Bank(NHB) and State Bank of India(SBI) as Central Nodal Agencies (CNAs) to channelize the subsidy  under the PMAY Scheme to the beneficiaries through lending institutions.  As per the PMAY Scheme, eligible applicants can apply for availing  benefit under the PMAY scheme  online as well as offline. After completing all the requirements, printout of the application is submitted to the lending institution. Similarly customers who wish to apply for Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana offline can do so by filling the form available at the Common Service Centre (CSC) established by the State Governments. Home loan borrowers who are eligible for PMAY Credit Linked Subsidy Scheme subsidy but have not availed it when taking a home loan can submit their request to their bank or lending institution. The lender will review  the request for PMAY scheme and will submit the claim to National Housing Bank (NHB). NHB, after performing data validation and other checks, will disburse the subsidy amount to the respective lender who will credit the amount to the home loan account of the borrower and adjust in the loan accordingly. In the present  case, the appellants have not brought on record any document  to show that they had applied online or offline  for availing the benefit under PMAY scheme and submitted the requisite document to the first lending institution i.e. LIC Housing corporation or to the respondents. Under the PMAY scheme, benefit of interest is decided by the Central Nodal Agencies and the subsidy amount is disbursed to the respective lender.

 10.                 Thus, we find no case made out to modify the impugned order and grant any relief other than granted by the Ld. Lower Commission. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed, with no order as to costs. 

 11.           Misc. application(s), if any pending, also stands disposed of.

 12.       Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge.

13.                     The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.