DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.
Case No.09/2011
Sh. Khushal Chand
S/o Late Sh. Sewa Ram
R/o 38, Teli Wara, Shahdara,
Delhi-110032 ….Complainant
Versus
Citi Financial Consumer Finance India Ltd.
(through its Managing Director/Director/Secretary)
3, LSC, Pushp Vihar,
New Delhi-110062 ……Opposite Party
Date of Institution : 06.01.11 Date of Order : 09.06.16
Coram:
Sh. N.K. Goel, President
Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member
Sh. S. S. Fonia, Member
O R D E R
Briefly stated, the case of the Complainant is that in the month of November, 2005 the representatives of OP approached him regarding loan facility. On the basis of advertisement appearing in the media he agreed to avail a loan of Rs.25,000/- from OP. The official of OP had stated to him that they will charge interest @ 1.75% per month approx. on the reducing balance. He trusted the OP and signed all the documents some of which were partly filled or fully blank for availing loan facility. At the time of filling the documents, the representative of OP assured him that he will provide the copies of all the documents to him but neither any document nor any payment schedule was provided to him. He opted for making the payment through ECS. He was informed that EMIs will of Rs.1313/- each and as at the time he could not understand the calculation of interest, accordingly he did not raise any objection. He received a cheque of Rs.22375/- vide loan account No.6976309 and he came know that the OP had already deducted two EMIs from his loan account itself. He demanded complete details regarding the loan and repayment but OP did not provide the same but he continued to make the payment to the OP regularly through ECS. The eleven installments were paid to the OP. The official of the OP then informed him that if a fresh loan is taken by him after adjusting the loan the rate of interest would come down substantially. Accordingly, the OP gave fresh loan to him vide loan No. 9499636 after adjusting the existing loan and paid a sum of Rs.24211/- and he was informed that new EMIs would be of Rs. 1963/- but the complete schedule of payment was not provided to him still he continued to make the payment to the OP regularly through ECS. He sent several representations to the OP for complete details regarding rate of interest and method of calculation of interest and EMIS but the OP delayed the matter on one pretext or the other. The representative of OP informed him that they will further reduce the rate of interest after taking approval from higher authorities. The OP offered a fresh loan in June, 2007 on reduced rate of interest after adjusting the existing loan. In the month of June, he received a cheque for Rs.38396/- vide account No.12330888 after adjusting the existing loan and the EMI would be of a sum of Rs.3209/-. However, as promised by the OP they did not provide the complete details regarding the rate of interest and method of calculation of interest and EMIs. The OP made an unauthorized withdrawal of Rs.1963/- on 05.07.05 from his account when he protested against the same but the OP kept silent for several months and did not give any clarification regarding unwarranted sudden withdrawal. After several representation, reminders and personal visits, the OP issued a refunded cheque on 16.11.07 i.e. after 4 months 11 days. They also illegally deducted Rs.321/- from the refunded amount. He was making EMIs regularly to the OP. After so many representations and reminders he received the payment schedule from the OP on 15.03.10 and 17.07.10 but the same did not show the principal amount outstanding after each and every EMIs. The Complainant has stated that after close scrutiny it was found that the OP had added up not only the principal amount outstanding in the previous loan but also the future interest which had neither accrued nor due on that date and hence the OP started taking heavy interest from him on a non existing interest liability from the previous loan and he was doubled penalized for non of his fault. Thereafter he sent various representations to the OP for proper charging of the interest but the OP did not give any specific reply. He stopped the payment of last installments of Rs. 3209/- due on 05.08.10. The OP through representation approached him and informed that his grievances would be addressed to the higher authorities and pleaded him to make the payment of last installment alongwith dishonour charges. Trusting the OP he deposited the demanded amount. Thereafter he gave several visits to the OP and met the concerned officials and requested them to process his request but no proper reply was received from them. He sent a legal notice dated 14.09.10 but no reply was received. Hence, there is a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP. The Complainant has prayed as under:-
- Direct the OP to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and damages for causing mental tension, agony and harassment to the Complainant, Rs.5500/- as cost of litigation alongwith pendentelite and future interest @ 24% per annum till realization of above mentioned amounts.
OP in the written statement has stated that the Complainant had approached the OP for availing the facility of personal loan. After considering the request of the Complainant they sanctioned a personal loan of Rs.25,000/- at the rate of 23.2% per annum on 29.11.05 vide loan account No. 6976309 and disbursed the amount of Rs.22375/- after deduction of process fee and other necessary statutory charges after due execution of the agreement between the parties. It was repayable in 30 EMIs of Rs.1313/-. The Complainant was in need of money and again approached the OP for personal loan. Considering his request they sanctioned personal loan of Rs.43750/- at the rate of 20.51% (fixed) after the deduction of process fee, statutory charges and previous loan and an amount of Rs.24211/- was disbursed to him vide loan account No. 9499636 which was repayable in 36 EMIs of Rs.1963/-. He again approached them for the loan and on the request of the customer an amount of Rs.75,000/- was sanctioned to him at the rate of 18.1% per annum which was repayable in 36 EMIs of Rs.3029/- vide loan account No.12330888 after adjustment of the previous loan dues of Rs.35368/- and deduction of necessary charges. OP has stated that the Complainant had paid 10 installments of Rs.1313/- only in discharge of the above said loan and 10 installments of Rs.1963/- . The Complainant submitted the post dated cheque dated 05.07.07 of Rs.1963/- (installment amount). They processed it for clearing before one month i.e. 29.06.07 (the date of the foreclosure) due to the large number of presentation of the cheques the same was sent before one month in advance. The Complainant broke the repayment schedule and he requested his banker for stop payment but he did not inform the OP for not presenting the cheque before one month of the foreclosure date. It is denied that OP had presented the cheque for unauthorized withdrawal. The said amount had already been returned to the Complainant vide cheque No. 806076 after the adjustment of the interest component of Rs.320.42p due to the Complainant. They are non banking financial company and operating under a valid licence issued by the RBI and operating as per the rules and regulations of the RBI framed from time to time. OP has stated that the Complainant has imputed allegations of criminal nature. These allegations being of criminal nature cannot be taken cognizance of by this Forum. Denying any deficiency in service, the OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
Complainant has filed rejoinder to the written statement of OP.
Complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence while affidavit of Ms. Priya Ranjan, AR has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OP.
Written arguments have been on behalf of the parties.
We have heard the arguments on behalf of the parties and have also gone through the file very carefully.
It is evident that the complainant filed the present complaint after the payment of the entire loan amount to the OP. In our considered opinion, as soon as the complainant paid the last instalment by making payment of Rs. 3209/-, he ceased to be a consumer as defined in the Consumer Protection Act. Therefore, we hold that the complainant is not a consumer as defined in the Consumer Protection Act. Therefore, we dismiss the complaint with no order as to costs.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
(S. S. Fonia) (Naina Bakshi) (N. K. Goel)
Member Member President
Announced on 09.06.16
Case No. 09/11
09.06.2016
Present – None.
Vide our separate order of even date pronounced, the complaint is dismissed. Let the file be consigned to record room.
(S. S. Fonia) (Naina Bakshi) (N. K. Goel)
Member Member President
