District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No. 591/2021.
Date of Institution: 17.11.2021.
Date of Order: 23.01.2023.
Ashish Kumar Age 26 S/o Shri Arun Kumar R/o H.NO. 218, Palla No.3, Power House Amar Nagar – 121003.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. Cap float Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Head Office:- Gokaldas Platinum, New No.3 (Old NO.211), Upper Palace Orchards, Bellary road, Sadashiva Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 080. CIN: U65993KA1993PTC-74590 Email:Info@capitalflat,com.
2. Branch Office:-
Add: B-36, Third floor Old Rajendera Nagar, Block-II, Pusa road, New Delhi – 110 060.
3. Pankaj Mandotia, Manager CapFloat Delhi Office, Collection Department, Branch Office: B-36 Third floor, Old Rajendra Nagar, Block-II, Pusa Road, New Delhi – 110 060, Mob. No. 9999818294.
4. Mohan Prasad, Customer Relationship Executive, Collection department, Branch Office:- B-36 Third floor, Old Rajendra Nagar, Block-II, Pusa road, New Delhi – 110060, Mob. No. 8448429401.
…Opposite parties……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana………….Member.
PRESENT: Complainant in person.
Sh. Tarun Gupta, counsel for opposite parties Nos.1 & 2.
Opposite parties Nos.3 & 4 exparte vide order dated 31.03.2022.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant was having loan amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and the complainant had made 18 installments, in September 2021 Customer Relationship Executive ( No.4) namely Mr. Mohan Prasad approached the complainant asked the customer relationship Executive (No.4) about the foreclosure amount 37554/- and Rs.31,100/- was told to complainant by opposite party No.4. His foreclosures amount which was Rs.37,554/- as per the opposite parties Nos.1 to 3, demand but opposite party No.4 told him to make payment of Rs.31,100/- and told it would foreclosure his loan as opposite party No.4 had discussed with his seniors and on instance of opposite party No.4 he made the payment. But later on opposite party nos.3 & 4 made a telephonic conversation to complainant and told kindly pay Rs.31,100/- and his loan would be foreclosed. The complainant deposited the said for closure amount through online mode on 29.09.2021 at 05:06 p.m on instance of opposite parties Nos.3 & 4 he made payment of Rs.31,100/-. But on next date (30.09.2011) of his payment Rs.6817/- was deducted from complainant bank account. He told whole
scenario to opposite party No.4 and he ensured complainant to check the matter/problem and would make money refund, but Rs.353/- was only refunded back to the complainant and due money Rs.6464/- was not refunded till date to the complainant. And due money Rs.6,464/- was not refunded till date to the complainant. The complainant approached the opposite party No.2 and told that Rs.6817/- amount was being deducted from his account, here opposite party No.2 assured that the payment was deducted by mistake and same would be refunded back to him in two working days, after two days complainant again approached opposite party No.2 but no satisfied answer was given to the complainant nor the money was not refunded till date and staff of capital float started ignoring the calls of the complainant. The aforesaid act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to:
a) step unfair trade practice against every consumer.
b) Unnecessarily 6,464/- deducted by complainant account may be returned to complainant with 5% interest from the date of deduction to till today.
c) pay Rs. 75,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
d) pay Rs.6,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite parties No.1 & 2 put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that it was submitted that the complainant had taken a loan for sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 which was payable by way of equated monthly installments. The complainant had also provided with the relevant documents in respect to loan which was granted to the complainant
Answering opposite parties denied each and every averment stated by the complainant and submitted nothing should be deemed to be admitted unless expressly admitted hereinafter. The complainant claims that the waiver of amount was promised by the customer relationship executive of the collection department which was wrong and false, hence denied. It was further submitted that the executive of the collection department had only given the assurance that he would “try” to get the same disputed amount waved, but he had never given any approval of the same said waiver. Instead of waiting for the confirmation from the side of the collection, department, the complainant himself on his own, without any consent, made a payment of Rs.31,100/- instead of Rs.37,554/-, The customer care executive never promised the complainant about the waiver of cost. However, now the complainant was expecting the answering opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 to refund the money which had been deducted which was wrong and baseless. Opposite parties Nos. 1 & 2 denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. Notice issued to opposite parties Nos.3 & 4 on dated 08.03.2022 not received back either served or unserved. Tracking details filed in which it had been mentioned that “Item Delivery Confirmed”. Case called several times since morning but none appeared on behalf of opposite parties Nos.3 & 4. Therefore, opposite parties Nos.3 & 4 were proceeded against ext-parte vide order dated 31.03.2022.
4. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
6. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties– Crop Float Financial Services with the prayer to: a) step unfair trade practice against every consumer. b) Unnecessarily 6,464/- deducted by complainant account may be returned to complainant with 5% interest from the date of deduction to till today. c) pay Rs. 75,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . d) pay Rs.6,000 /-as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Ashish Kumar, Ex.C-1 (colly) , Ex.C-2 (colly) – loan summary.
On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties No.1& 2 strongly agitated and opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 Ex. RW1/A – affidavit of Ashutosh Shandilya, authorized representative of Capfloat Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Having its branch office at B-36, Pusa Road, Block-11, Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi – 110 005, Mark - A (colly) minutes of meeting.
7. During the course of arguments, complainant has stated at Bar that a false compromise was given by the representative of the opposite parties. As per letter dated 4.10.2021 in which it has been mentioned that “the snapshots to deduction off my amount 6817.84/- and also I have paid already my foreclosure amount Rs.31100/-, this amount said by your employee the contact number is 918448429401 please do the needful because your employee said me this is foreclosure amount you pay I am waive off your other charges but my genuine foreclosure amount is Rs.37554.31/-.” The complainant is a lay man. This is admitted fact that there was compromised of waive of foreclosure charges.
8. After going through the evidence led by the parties, the Commission
is of the opinion that the complaint is allowed. Opposite parties Nos.1 to 4, jointly & severally, are directed to refund the amount of Rs.6464/- alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till its realization. There are no order as to costs. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Copy of this order be given to the parties concerned free of costs and file be consigned to record room.
Announced on: 23.01.2023. (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
