Ld. Advocate(s)

                        For Complainant:  Rajdeep Majumdar.

                        For OP/OPs : S. Biswas.

Date of filing of the case       : 05.12.2022

Date of Disposal  of the case          : 22.06.2023                        

The facts of the case –

Complainant is an account holder of PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK (FORMERLY UNITED BANK OF INDIA) and it has been further mentioned that complainant was taken house building loan from the OP of Rs. 7,80,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Eighty Thousand Only) with the agreement to refund the amount in One Hundred Twenty Monthly installments payable @ Rs. 10,525/- On 14/02/2011. Ops was started EMIs from the complainant’s salary Account No. (0221300062426) and month of February, 2011 complainant housing loan was complete.

Thereafter complainant was update his bank statement that he found two unsolicited insurance, one has BAJAJ ALLIANCE life to premium amount of Rs. 10,696/- and another was TATA AIG life insurance to the premium Rs. 23,339/- were debited from the complainant’s account without any intimation and the complainant’s consent and also which was started date of 3^rd September, 2010 and 1^st November, 2010.

 After the OP Bank continued to debit EMI till October, 2021, total an undue amount of Rs. 1,05,250/-  (Rupees One Lakh Five Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Only) Thereafter the complainant contact with the Bank Manager regarding this matter through written application and he also reminded the OP. The complainant has filed a written complaint on 21/06/2021 without getting any positive response.

Thereafter the complainant informed the higher Bank authorities complainant also informed PNB Grievance Cell and their also failed to way solution. The complainant also lodge a complaint with Banking OMBUDSMEN on 03/10/2021 along with documents but they were failed to solve the grievance.

Thereafter complaint contact with OP to settle the matter which the manager offered the complainant to return since it was debited towards payment of premium for unsolicited insurance (TATA AIG Life Insurance) that such an offer for settlement accepting amount of Rs. 24,000/- where as complainant suffered a loss of amount of Rs. 1,05,250/- due to deduction of 10 undue installments. The complainant was shocked and rejected the offer.

The above acts of Ops amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and cheating causing a financial loss. So having no alternative complaint filed this case before the Commission for relief’s as prayer as mentioned:-

1. OP Bank authority refunds undue extra amount of ten installment with interest to the complainant.
2. If also OP to pay further sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Two Lakh) as compensation of adopting unfair trade practice and for causing mental pain, agony and harassment and litigation cost.

 After admission of the complainant notice were issued upon OP. The OP were appeared and OP filed a petition praying for time to submit W.V. after passing of time.

So the prayer of OP was rejected and case was proceed to ex-parte against the OP.

The complainant filed his examination-in- chief by affidavit with documents and argument was heard by the side of complainant.

Decision with reason

All the points are taken up together for discussion for the sake of convenience as each are enter related. From the documents filed by the complainant that it is admitted fact that the complainant has taken a housing loan from the OP and OP bank debited EMI regularly from the complainant salary accounts. Thus complainant covered the provision of consumer as provided in the Consumer Protection Act.

From the Xerox of dues certificate filed by the complainant it is clear that OP bank does not have any claim whatsoever against the complainant in relation to this housing loan. It is also established fact that complainant were not aware those insurance policies.

Under this circumstances evidence of the complainant remains on challenged and there is no reason to disbelieves this evidence. So this commission is of the view that the complainant has been able to prove his case by adducing oral as well as documentary evidence that the OP debited amount of money without the complainant consent that it is unfair trade practice as per provision of Consumer Protection Act.

Accordingly the complainant’s case succeeds and is entitled for the reliefs.

Hence, it is 

ORDERED

The complaint Case No. 115/2022 is allowed ex-parte with cost against the OP. The complainant is entitled for his net claim value amount to Rs. 1,05,250/- from the OP and with an interest @ 8% p.a. since the date of filing of this case till the date of order. It is further order complainant shall be entitled for Rs. 1,00,000/- towards mental agony and unfair trade practice from the Ops.

The Ops are further directed to pay the above amount within 45 days from the date of this order and in default the amount shall carry further interest @ 12% p.a. thereafter till realization.

In default the complainant shall be at liberty to execute the case as per law.

Let a copy  of this judgment / final order be supplied to the parties  free of cost.

   Dictated & corrected by me.

 ............................................

                MEMBER

 (SMT MALLIKA SAMADDER,)

                                                                                              MEMBER

                                                                        (SMT MALLIKA SAMADDER,)

We concur,

       .............................................                                                  .............................................        

               MEMBER                                                                                 PRESIDENT   

(SHRI NIROD BARAN ROY CHOWDHURY)                           (SHRI DAMAN PROSAD BISWAS)