IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.

CASE No.  CC/73/2018.

 Date of Filing:                    Date of Admission:                Date of Disposal:

    24.04.18                                                04.05.18                                             28.03.19

Complainant: Ratan Kumar Roy

S/O- Late Baidya Nath Roy,

Vill & PO- Dafahat, PS- Suti,

Pin- 742224

-Vs-

Opposite Party: 1.Branch Manager, Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank,

Aurangabad Branch

Vill & PO & PS- Aurangabad,

Pin- 742201

2.The Regional Manager, Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank,

Murshidabad Regional Office,

48, Naya Sarak Road, Gorabazar,

PO & PS- Berhampore,

Pin- 742101

3.The General Manager, Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank,

Head Office, BMC House,

NH 34, PO- Chaltia PS- Berhampore,

Pin- 742407,

Agent/Advocate for the Complainant             : In person.

Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party No.1 :Sri. Subhanjan Sengupta.

Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party No.2 :None.

Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party No.3 :None.

                       Present:   Sri Asish  Kumar Senapati………………….......President.                              

                                          Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.

FINAL ORDER

 Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay, Member.

  This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.

  One Ratan Kr. Roy (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against The Branch Manager, Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank and Ors. (here in after referred to as the OPs) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.

The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:

  The Complainant has applied for house building loan from Bangiya Gramin Bikash Bank (erstwhile Gaur Gramin Bank) for a sum of Rs.1,83,000/- and the same has been sanctioned by the O.P vide sanction No. ADV/HBL/Others/Comm/BL-205/851/45 dated 05.11.04, where  the interest was settled as per the Bank circular letter No. 2191 dated 17.05.04 and repayment period schedule was mention as 156 equated monthly installments as per circular No. 1956/1885 @ 2015 per month commencing from six months from the disbursement or the conception of construction which ever is earlier. The Complainant accepted the terms and conditions of that sanction letter. From 17.05.05 the Complainant paid regular EMI amounting Rs.2,015/- in cash in every successive months. But after completion of 151 installments, the OP forcibly adjusted the money back amount of Rs.9,950/- on 08.06.10 from the LIC policy which was kept as co-lateral security to the said house building loan without  giving information to the Complainant. The Complainant also noticed that on 16.02.16 the OP at his own motion  had debited an amount of Rs.1,490/- from the savings Bank account of the complainant  and adjusted the same towards the house building loan amount. The OP had collected Rs. (2015 x151=3,04,265/- + Rs.9,950/- + Rs/1,490/-), here by a sum of total Rs 3,15,705/- but as per agreement the amount of Rs.3,14,340/- was repayable as it was settled that 156 installment has to be paid by the Complainant @ Rs.2,015/-. The Complainant stated in the petition of complaint that OP is still showing the outstanding figures in the said loan account and creating pressure for liquidation of the same. The Complainant sent query for that but no positive result has been received.

  Finding no other alternative, the Complainant filed the case before this Forum for appropriate relief.

  The OP after service of the notice filed written version, stating that the Complainant has no locus standi to file the present case against the OP as the Complainant had put his signature on the agreement where it has been stated that the rate of interest was floating. So, there is no error in calculating the repayable loan amount and no question of refund arose,so the case is liable to be dismissed.

  Now the question arises whether the Complainant is a consumer and he is entitled to get relief as prayed for?

Decision with reason

  Admittedly, the Complainant availed of a house building loan of Rs.1,83,000/- from the OP vide sanction No. ADV/HBL/Others/Comn/BL-205/851/45 dated 05.11.04 which is to be remitted in 156 installments @ Rs.2,015/- per month commencing from 17.05.15. so the complainant became consumer of the O.P as per the Consumer Protection Act.

  It is in evidence that the Complainant has paid 151 installments without any default. It is also clear from the photocopy of the PassBook that a sum of Rs.3,15,705/- (Rs.2,015 x 151+9,950+1,490/-) remitted from the Complainant.

  The OP in his written version stated that though the repayable amount was settled of Rs.3,14,340/- (Rs.2,015 x 156) on repayment of 156 installments but it was based on a floating rate of interest. So no excess amount had been taken off. We are declined to accept the plea of the OP in absence of any cogent document that the rate of interest was floating one.

  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and documents filed by the parties we are of the opinion that there is deficiency of service on the part of the O.P by not returning the excess amount of Rs.1,365/- (Rs.3,15,705-3,14,340) as it was settled between the parties at the time of sanction of loan that only 3,14,340/- had to be paid by the Complainant but the OP has taken a sum of Rs.3,15,705/- as  repayment of loan amount.

  On the basis of the above discussion we are of the view that the Complainant is entitled for relief. O.P may be directed to return the excess amount with litigation cost and compensation for mental pain and agony.

Reasons for delay

            The Case was filed on 24.04.18 and admitted on 04.05.18. This Forum tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act,1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day order.

In the result, the Consumer case succeeds.

Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is

                                                Ordered

   that the complaint Case No.CC/73/2018 be and the same is hereby  allowed on contest against the OPs with cost.

  The O.P is directed to refund the sum of Rs1365/-to the Complainant.    

  The O.P is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- for litigation cost and Rs.1000/-  for mental pain and agony to the Complainant.

  All the aforesaid orders must be complied within 60 days from the date of this order.

           Let a copy of this order  be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand  /by post under proper acknowledgment  as per rules, for information and necessary action.

The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:

    confonet.nic.in

Dictated & corrected by me.

          Member

Member                                                                                           President.