Date of Filing:18.12.2008<br /> Date of Order: 15.06.2010<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2010<br /> <br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2734 OF 2008<br /> <br /> A. Nanjunda Swamy<br /> Aakaanksha, No. 130/33<br /> Mahaganapathi Nagar, Gottigere<br /> Bannerghtta Road, Bangalore 83 Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> Branch Manager<br /> M/s. BHW Home Finance Ltd.<br /> 202A, 2nd Floor, No. 136<br /> Cears Plaza, Opp. to Bangalore Club<br /> Residency Road, Bangalore 560 025 Opposite Party<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> The complainant has filed this complaint seeking following reliefs against opposite party. <br /> a) Issue direction to the Company to set right the accounts forthwith and not to insist on EMI cheques till the accounts are set right.<br /> b) Issue direction to the Company, to withdraw the legal notice issued to me.<br /> c) To direct the Company to withdraw the overdue payment and other charges amounting to Rs. 10,839/-.<br /> d) To give account of the LIC amounts received without any further delay.<br /> e) For the mental agony and tension caused by them through their letters/representatives/ legal notice, compensation of Rs. 20,000/- may kindly be awarded.<br /> The case of the complainant is that he had drawn housing loans from the opposite party during 2002 for construction of house. Opposite party is in the habit of leveling charges like over due payment, cheque bounce charges etc. although no amount is pending. The opposite party had taken 2 LIC polices of complainant as a pledge. The opposite party has received the amount from the LIC. Even though opposite party has collected cheques in advance he has repeatedly disturbing the complainant over phone. Opposite party is sending letters without even caring to set right their account and gone to the extent of issuing legal notice for no fault of complainant. Opposite party is not furnishing correct accounts. The amount received by the opposite party is yet to be accounted. This is a very serious lapse on the part of opposite party. In the letters dated 06.12.2007 and on 31.10.2008 a credit of Rs. 56,240/- is shown as against receipt of LIC maturity amount of Rs. 63,477/-. This clearly shows that the intention of the company is only to drag on the issue. There is clear violation of basic ethics of principles of banking and deficiency of service on the part of the company on various issues.<br /> 2. Opposite party filed defence version stating that complaint is false and frivolous. Complainant has availed housing loans from the Vysya Bank and same was taken over by the opposite party. monthly EMI was Rs. 6,513/-. The loan account No. BNG/001167 is closed. Complainant is in default of payment of 4 installments of Rs. 5,311/- totally amounting to Rs. 21,360/- towards the loan account No. BNG/001166. The opposite party has received LIC maturity amount during September 2007 and same was adjusted towards loan account. The opposite party company is agreeable to withdraw the notice if the customer repays all the due amounts. Opposite party company has given best services to the complainant by visiting number of times to the complainant’s place. There is no deficiency of service. The opposite party has reduced the rate of interest on the loan account as a special case. There is no cause of action for the complainant to file complaint. For all these reasons stated above the opposite party has prayed to dismiss the complaint.<br /> 3. The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence and documents. Likewise on behalf of opposite party affidavit evidence of M.L. Rajendra, Assistant Manager – Recovery has been filed.<br /> 4. Arguments are heard.<br /> 5. I have gone through the pleading of parties and the various documents produced by complainant and opposite party. When the matter was posted for arguments the learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that matter has been settled and there are no outstanding issues or disputes between the parties. The learned counsel submitted that the complainant has to pay only Rs. 1,152/- and opposite party is ready to give NOC, all the documents and insurance policies to the complainant. This submission of the learned advocate for the opposite party has been recorded in the order sheet dated 26.02.2010. The complainant was present in person. He however disputes the account statement and his liability to pay Rs. 1,152/-. According to the complainant he has paid entire loan amount and there is absolutely no balance or dues payable by him to opposite party and the complainant submits that opposite party may be directed to give No Due Certificate and all the original documents and insurance policies to him since he has paid the entire loan amount and there is absolutely no balance payable by him. So under these circumstances it is just, fair and reasonable to accept the submissions made by the complainant and direct the opposite party to give NOC, original documents and insurance policy to the complainant. There are no issues to be decided in the present complaint. During pendency of the proceedings before this forum some amounts have been paid by the complainant and the entire admissible and legal dues, outstanding balance having paid by the complainant it becomes duty of the opposite party to give NOC, documents and insurance policies to the complainant. Complainant herein is a ‘Consumer’ under the definition of Consumer Protection Act. His interest requires to be protected since, Consumer Protection Act is a social and benevolent legislation. Consumer is a most important visitor in the premises of service provider. He is not dependent on the service provider / bank. On the other hand service provider / financial institutions are depending on the customers. Service providers are not doing any favour to the customer or consumer. On the other hand ‘Consumer’ is doing favour by giving an opportunity to serve him. In this case the opposite party as a financial institution should have maintained good and harmonious relationship with the complainant. It is unfortunate that the matter has been dragged upon to this forum for settling the issues. However, the case ended with a happy note that the learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that opposite party is ready to give NOC and documents to the complainant. With this observation I proceed to pass the following:<br /> ORDER<br /> 6. The complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to give NOC in respect of two housing loans and return all the original documents and insurance policies to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order. The opposite party is directed to send the above documents directly to the address of the complainant as shown in the cause title of this order.<br /> 7. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 8. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2010. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER<br />