D.O.F:04/10/2018
D.O.O:20/10/2021
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.No.162/2018
Dated this, the 20th day of October 2021
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K :PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
Dhanya S.O aged 28 years
W/o Udaya Kumar.R
R/at Guru Nilaya, Near G.W.L.P School : Complainant
Kuntangaradka, Kumbala, Kasaragod.
(Adv: Udayakumar.R)
And
1. Chandrashekaran.B
The Sales Executive,
HDFC Sales Private Ltd
2nd Floor, Safari Palace,
Opposite Vyapara Bhavan
Main Road Kanhangad – 671351 : Opposite Parties
2. The Branch Manager
HDFC Sales Private Ltd
2nd Floor, Safari Palace,
Opposite Vyapara Bhavan
Main Road Kanhangad – 671351
(Adv: A. Radhakrishnan)
ORDER
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER
The instant complaint has been filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended) Briefly stated, the case of the complaint is that the complainant, who is employee in Govt. Health Dept., filed an application to the Opposite Parties to take off a housing loan of her husband, existing at Syndicate Bank Kumbla Branch. The Opposite Party No .1, who is the Sales Executive of the Opposite Party No.2, received all the original documents on 28-11-2017, with an assurance that the loan would be sanctioned within 2 weeks. Also the Opposite Party No.1 received a cheque for Rs.6,700/- towards processing fees. On 28-12-2017, the complainant received an e -mail regarding the confirmation of receipt of Ioan application. Thereafter on 31. 12.2017, when the complainant's husband enquired, the Opposite Party No.1 informed that the amount would be transferred on or before 05-01-2018. But the Opposite Parties did not sanctioned the loan and the complainant filed CC No. 24/2018 against Opposite Parties before this Forum. Thereafter the above said case was withdrawn on the assurance of the Opposite Parties to consider the fresh application to be filed in the name of complainant. Accordingly the application and documents were handed over to Opposite Party No.1, but the loan was not sanctioned. There after the complainant approached the Opposite Parties several times for return of title deed documents and refund of the amount, but the Opposite Party didn't comply with .By that time the complainant received notice from Syndicate Bank Kumbla Branch to repay the whole loan amount due to default in repayment. The non sanctioning of the loan to the complainant is gross negligence and service deficiency on the part of the Opposite Parties and thereby the complainant suffered mental agony. Hence this complaint is filed for the relief of a direction to the Opposite Parties, (1) to return the documents ie : the Tax Receipts of property and house of the complainant and Salary slips, (2) to return the amount of Rs.6,700/- (2) to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and inconveniences, along with costs.
The notice to Opposite Parties served, but only Opposite Party No. 2 entered appearance and filed written statement . The Opposite Party No. 2 contented that the allegations in the complaint are incorrect and false .The complaint is an abuse of judicial process.
The Opposite Party No. 2 admit that the complaint applied to take off a housing Ioan of her husband at Syndicate Bank Kumbla Branch and that they received all the documents necessary for loan. It is also admitted that the Opposite Party No.1 had taken a cheque for Rs.6,700/- as processing fee. But denied that Opposite Parties agreed to get an approval on 31.12.2017. It is in correct to state that Opposite Party No.1 informed the complainant is husband that the amount will be transferred on or before 05.01.2018. It is true that the complainant filed CC No. 24/2018 against Opposite Parties which was withdrawn on 28.03.2018. It is not correct to state that a fresh application was filed in the name of complainant is husband .It is also denied that complainant handed over all the related documents along with loan application to Opposite Party No.1 and thereafter complainant approached Opposite Parties several times and Opposite Parties are restraining to give loan. It is submitted that on verification of loan details with Syndicate Bank it was found that the complainant was very irregular in repayment of loan. As per ClBlL report ,the complainant and her husband have defaulted many Ioans from other financial institutions also . Both parties report found very poor score and not in a position to sanction the loan. It is a condition precedent that an amount of Rs.6,700/- to be paid in advance as process fee at the time of loan application, which is not refundable. All the documents of the complainant were submitted before the Forum and were handed over to the complainant at the time of CC 24/2018. At present there no document of the complainant with Opposite Parties. There is no negligence or Service deficiency on the part of Opposite Parties. The complaint is misconceived, false and meritless and hence liable to be dismissed. There is no merit or bonafide in filing the complainant but only to protract and pressurize the Opposite Parties for monetary bargain.
The Complainant did not adduced oral evidence but produced certain documents which are marked as Ext. A 1 to Ext. A6. The Ext - A1 is the notice dated 07.09.2018 issued by Syndicate Bank Kumbla Branch Ext A 2 is the O/c of complaint filed in CC 24/2018, Ext. A3 is the copy of e -mail message from Opposite Party No .2 , Ext. A4 is the copy of certificate issued by Syndicate Bank Kumbla Branch. Ext A5 is the copy of Statement of account for the period 01-01-2018 to 28.09. 2018, Ext. A6 is the notice dated 07.09.2018 issued by Syndicate Bank Kumbla Branch. From the side of Opposite Parties, the Manager of Opposite Party No. 2 examined as DW 1 and a document is marked as Ext. B1. The Ext. B1 is a model Loan application form.
Based on the pleadings and evidence of the rival parties in this case the following issues are framed for consideration.
1. Whether there is any negligence or service deficiency on the part of the Opposite Party?
2. If so, what is the relief?
For convenience, both these issues are considered together.
Here the specific case of the complainant is that she filed an application to the Opposite Parties to take off a housing loan of her husband, existing at Syndicate Bank Kumbla Branch. The Opposite Party No .1 , who is the Sales Executive of the Opposite Party No.2 received all the original documents on 28-11-2017 with the assurance that the loan would be sanctioned within 2 weeks . Also the Opposite Party No.1 received a cheque for Rs.6,700/- towards processing fees . On 28-12-2017 the complainant received an e -mail regarding the confirmation of receipt of Ioan application. Thereafter on 31. 12.2017, the complainant's husband enquired the Opposite Party No.1 informed that the amount would be transferred on or before 05-01-2018. But the Opposite Parties did not sanctioned the loan and the complainant filed CC No. 24/2018 against OPs before this Forum. Thereafter the above said case was withdrawn on the assurance of the Opposite Parties to consider the fresh application to be filed in the name of complainant. Accordingly the application and documents were handed over to Opposite Party No.1 but the loan was not sanctioned. There after the complainant approached the Opposite Parties several times for return of the documents and refund of the amount but the Opposite Party didn't comply with .By that time the complainant received notice from Syndicate Bank Kumbla Branch to repay the whole loan amount due to default in repayment. The non sanctioning of the loan to the complainant is gross negligence and service deficiency on the part of the Opposite Parties and thereby the complainant suffered mental agony.
As per the version of the Opposite Parties, it is contented that the allegations in the complaint are incorrect and false .The complaint is an abuse of judicial process.
The Opposite Party No. 2 admit that the complaint applied to take off a housing Ioan of her husband at Syndicate Bank Kumbla Branch and that they received all the documents necessary for loan. It is also admitted that the Opposite Party No.1 had taken a cheque for Rs.6,700/- as processing fee. But denied that Opposite Parties agreed to get an approval on 31.12.2017. It is in correct to state that Opposite Party No.1 informed to complainant’s husband that the amount will be transferred on or before 05.01.2018. It is true that the complainant filed CC No. 24/2018 against Opposite Parties, which was withdrawn on 28.03.2018. It is not correct to state that a fresh application was filed in the name of complainant .It is also denied that complainant handed over all the related documents along with loan application to Opposite Party No.1 and thereafter complainant approached Opposite Parties several times and Opposite Parties are restraining to give loan.
It is submitted that on verification of loan details with Syndicate Bank it was found that the complainant was very irregular in repayment of loan. As per ClBlL report ,the complainant and her husband have defaulted many Ioans from other financial institutions also . Both parties report found very poor score and not in a position to sanction the loan. It is a condition precedent that an amount of Rs.6,700/- to be paid in advance as process fee at the time of loan application, which is not refundable. All the documents of the complainant were submitted before the Forum and were handed over to the complainant at the time of CC 24/2018. At present there no document of the complainant with Opposite Parties. There is no negligence or Service deficiency on the part of Opposite Parties.
Here the Opposite Parties has no dispute regarding the receipt of the first Loan Application along with necessary documents from the complainant and also the receipt the process fee of Rs.6,700/-. Their argument is that on verification of loan details with Syndicate Bank it was found that the complainant was very irregular in repayment of loan. As per ClBlL report, the complainant and her husband have defaulted many Ioans from other financial Institutions also. Both parties report found very poor score and not in a position to sanction the loan.
The complainant produced a document Ext. A4, a certificate issued by Syndicate Bank Kumbla Branch, which show that the loan account of complainant's husband is regular and has no over dues as on date 30.01.2018. The CIBIL report is not before this commission. The Opposite Parties argues that they denied Ioan to the complainant based on such a report. The Opposite Parties didn't adduced reliable evidence to show that their service to the complainant, after receiving the loan application with necessary process fee, was fair and justifiable.
As regards to the process fee Opposite Parties argue that it is a condition precedent that an amount of Rs.6,700/- , to be paid in advance as process fee at the time of loan application and it is not refundable.
The complainant argue that CC 24/2018, was withdrawn on the assurance of the Opposite Parties to consider the fresh application to be filed in the name of complainant. Accordingly the application and documents were handed over to Opposite Party No.1, but the loan was not sanctioned. There after the complainant approached the Opposite Parties several times for return of the documents and refund of the amount but the Opposite Party didn't comply with.
The Opposite Parties denied such assurance and receipt of fresh loan application. The complainant didn't produced any document to show that a second loan application was received in the name of complainant's husband. The document Ext. A3 contains two receipts, which are issued in the name of Smt. Dhanya. No receipt of any loan application in the name of complainant's husband.
As per Ext. A3, Opposite Parties informed the complainant that "Loan status : Regret our inability to process your loan application ". It is pertinent to note that the OPs didn't stated any reason for their inability to process. After receiving a considerable amount in advance as process fee, the Opposite Parties failed to inform the exact reason for not processing the loan. This stand cannot be accepted. If it was due to poor CIBIL report, it could have been stated there in . Since such a reason was not stated in the Ext. A3 communication, it is not safe to hold that the rejection of Ioan was due to CIBlL report. Now also there is no evidence before this commission, except some barren statements. So there is negligence and service deficiency on the part of Opposite Parties.
Regarding the return of documents, the Opposite Parties argue that all the documents received from the complainant were submitted before this Forum in CC 24/2018, which were handed over to the complainant and presently no document is with them.
The complainant didn't furnished the list of the any important title deed documents, that are being illegally kept by the Opposite Parties even after the non - sanctioning of the loan. In the last part of the complaint it is mentioned about the Tax Receipts of house and property and Salary slips only. Which are issued by the concerned authorities at the time of Tax payment every year or periodically. There is no evidence to show such documents were received by Opposite Parties. So the claim for return of such documents cannot be aIIowed.
In this circumstance, this commission of the view that since the rejection of the loan to the complainant was not based on any justifiable reason, Opposite Parties failed to provide proper service to the complainant, after receiving the loan application with necessary process fee. Hence there is negligence and service deficiency on the part of Opposite Parties. Due to the service deficiency of the Opposite Parties, the complainant suffered mental agony for which both the Opposite Parties are jointly and severally Iiable to compensate. An amount of Rs.10,000/- will be a reasonable compensation.
In the result the complaint is allowed in part and the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) towards costs.
Time for compliance is 30 days from receipt of copy of this Judgement.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1- The notice Dt: 07/09/2018
A2- The O/c of complaint filed in CC- 24/18
A3- copy of E-mail message
A4- Copy of certificate issued by Syndicate Bank Kumbala Branch
A5- Statement of account
A6- The notice Dt: 07/09/2018
B1- Individual loan application form
Witness Examined
Dw1- Roopesh.K
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Senior Superintendent
Ps/
