Haryana

Kurukshetra

22/2018

Arun Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

CBI - Opp.Party(s)

Shekhar Thakur

11 Dec 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KURUKSHETRA.

 

Consumer Complaint No.22 of 2018.

Date of instt.:23.1.2018.                       

Date of Decision:11.12.2019.

 

Arun Kumar s/o Shri Balbir Chand, r/o H.No.17, Model Town, Ward No.5, Pehowa, Distt. Kurukshetra.

                                                                        …….Complainant.                                         Versus

 

Central Bank of India, Branch Pehowa, Kaithal Road, Distt. Kurukshetra through its Branch Manager.

                ….…Opposite party.

 

Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before       Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.    

                   Ms. Neelam, Member.       

                   Shri Issam Singh Sagwal, Member.                                                   

Present:     Shri Shekhar Thakur, Advocate for the complainant.        

Ms. Purnima Malhotra, Advocate for the Opposite Party.

   

ORDER

                    This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by complainant Arun Kumar against Central Bank of India, the opposite party.

2.             The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is maintaining an OD account bearing No.21168140074 with the branch of OP and under that account, he has submitted his LIC policy No.172549679 for getting Rs.440000/- for as credit limit/drawing power. That on 12.6.2017, he paid an amount of Rs.49950/- under his said account and cleared whole overdraft amount till date and the balance was shown as Rs.364.10 as on credit site and asked the OP for closing his overdraft account, but it asked him to come later due to some technical reason. That he observed that the OP charged processing charges of Rs.3660/- on 21.6.2017 and service tax about Rs.549/- on the verge of renewal policy charges, where he never instructed or stated his intention to renew the policy. Further, the OP levied interest two times on 30.6.2017 i.e. Rs.94/- & Rs.2/- and again on 31.6.2017 about Rs.46/- & Rs.7/- and on 31.8.2017 about Rs.46/- & Rs.7/-, total amounting Rs.4431/- as whole. That he protested such unlawful charges vide his request letter dated 24.11.2017 and despite more than 45 days have been elapsed, the bank did not return the said amount. In this way, the OP is deficient in providing the services. Hence, this complaint.

3.             Upon notice, the opposite party appeared and filed written statement raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability; locus-standi; cause of action and jurisdiction. It is stated that the complainant has not come with clean hands and has suppressed the true & material facts from this Hon’ble Forum. The true & material facts are that initially, the complainant had obtained the OD Loan of Rs.1,50,000/- against the policy of LIC on dt. 12.1.2011, which was continued. Thereafter, the said OD loan was enhanced by the OP on the request of the complainant to the extent of Rs.3,00,000/- against the same policy on 03.4.2014. Thereafter, the complainant approached the OP bank for enhancement of the said OD limit to the extent of Rs.3,66,000/- and accordingly, the same was enhanced on 21.6.2016. Thereafter, the complainant again approached the OP to increase the OD limit from Rs.3,66,000/- to Rs.4,40,000/- and same was enhanced on 28.9.2017, subject to execution of certain documents in this regard. The pleading of the complainant qua the closing of overdraft loan account is totally false and frivolous, which cannot be believed, rather on 28.9.2017, the complainant himself approached the O bank for the enhancement of OD limit to the tune of Rs.4,40,000/- which was accordingly enhanced against the same policy of LIC. The complainant never moved any application to the OP for closing of the loan account as alleged by him. It is pertinent to mention here that whenever the loan was enhanced, processing charges have been levied by the OP bank as per terms & conditions. The complainant has filed the present complaint on the basis of misrepresentation and concealment of true facts, hence the same may be dismissed. On merits, the rest of the contents of the complaint are denied and prayed for dismissal the same with special costs.

4.             The complainant tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Ex.C-1 & Ex.C-2 in his evidence. On the other hand, the OP tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A alongwith documents Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-5 in its evidence.

5.             We have heard the learned counsel of the parties and carefully gone through the case file.

6.             From the pleadings and evidence of the parties, we found that the dispute between the parties is with regard to amount of Rs.4431/-charged by the OP bank from the OD account of the complainant. However, at the time of arguments, the learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that during the pendency of the present complaint, the OP admitted their fault and reversed the unauthorized charges, but still the OP is entitled for compensation for mental harassment and agony. However, the complainant has mentioned the said fact in Para No.5 of his affidavit dated 21.6.2019 Ex.CW-1/A also. We found force in the contention of the complainant, as the OP resolved the grievance of the complainant by reversing the said amount after filing the present complaint by the complainant, therefore, the OP is deficient in providing the services. As such, certainly the complainant is also entitled to get compensation on account of mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him.

7.             In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby allow the present complaint and direct the OP to pay Rs.3,000/- to the complainant as compensation on account of mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him. The OP is further directed to comply with the aforesaid direction within the period of 15 days from the date of preparation of certified copy of this order, failing which, the awarded amount shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of order till actual payment and the complainant will be at liberty to initiate proceedings under Section 25/27 of the Act against the OPs. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record-room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum:

Dt.:11.12.2019.                                                   (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                        President.

(Issam Singh Sagwal),         (Neelam)       

Member                             Member.