Punjab

Rupnagar

CC/16/28

Major Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Citi Financial & Others - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Ajay Talwar, Adv.

13 Feb 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTT. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,       ROPAR

                                                    Consumer Complaint No. : 28 of 09.06.2016

                                                    Date of decision                :  13.02.2017

 

 

                   Major Singh, son of Sh. Labh Singh, resident of Village Thona, PO                             Milanpur, Tehsil & District Roper, Punjab.

                                                                  ......Complainant

                                             Versus

 

          1.       Citi Finance, Citi Financial Consumer Finance India Ltd. C.F. 114,          Giani Zail Singh Nagar, Ropar-140001 through Manager.  

          2.       Citi Financial Citi Financial Consumer Finance India Limited, Branch                Office: SCO 407-408, Sector 35-C, Ground Floor, Chandigarh,                                    through Area Manager 

          3.       Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd, SCO-39, Beant Singh Aman Nagar, Bela                           Road, Rupnagar, through Manager 

          4.       Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd, SCO-153-154-155, Sector-9, Madhya                      Marg, Chandigarh, through Zonal Manager

           

                                                                                             ....Opposite Parties

 

                                       Complaint under Section 12 of the                                                                              Consumer Protection Act, 1986

 

          QUORUM

 

                                       MRS. NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT

                                      SMT. SHAVINDER KAUR, MEMBER

 

          ARGUED BY

 

 

          Sh.Ajay Talwar, Adv. counsel for complainant

          Opposite Parties No.1,3 & 4 ex-parte

          Complaint against O.P. No.2 stands DAW vide order            dated 15.11.2016

 

 

          ORDER

                                      MRS. NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT

 

                             Sh. Major Singh.  has filed this complaint under Section 12                      of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the                     Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘the                          O.Ps.’)  praying for the following reliefs:-

i)       To clear the loan amount of the complainant, issue the No Objection Certificate cum No Dues Certificate and clear the status of CIBIL of complainant,

ii)      To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him,

iii)     To pay Rs.20,000/- as cost of litigation, 

 

 

2.               In brief the case of the complainant is that he took loan of Rs.90,000/- from the O.P. No.1 in the year 2007,  it disbursed the loan amount through cheque after deducting some amount as file charges. At the time of taking loan, the O.P. No.1 assured him that a normal rate of interest as other non banking financial companies are charging, shall be charged from him. It did not give any detail regarding deduction of file charges inspite of many requests. It had also taken some duly signed post dated cheques from him. At the time of taking of said cheques, the O.P. No.1 told him that every month an amount of Rs.3682/- shall be withdrawn from his account.  Thereafter, regularly an amount of Rs.3682/- was deducted by it, through the post dated cheques issued by him, from his account, regularly and 13 installments of Rs.3682/- were deducted by the O.P. No.1 up to August 2009. Thereafter, in the month of August, he visited O.P. No.1, its employee told him that due to increase in the rate of interest, the loan term has been increased and he has to pay Rs.70,000/- more and asked him to give more post dated cheques. He told the said employee that he had almost paid the loan amount along with due interest. The said employee then told him that if he will refuse to pay the said amount then a criminal case would be filed against him by the finance company after the dishonouring of the cheques. He shocked to hear about this from the said employee.  It is further stated that, on receipt of legal notice dated 8.9.2009. The O.P. No.1 vide letter No.20100520J000388974 dated 20.5.2010, requested him to settle the loan and asked him to pay Rs.42,000/- but he did not pay the said amount as he was not in a position to pay the said amount. Thereafter, again O.P. No.1 through settlement letter No.20100706JP000413729 dated 09.07.2010, requested him for settlement of loan and asked him to pay a lum sum amount of Rs.30000/- in three installments. Accordingly, he deposited the amount of Rs.30,000/- with the O.P. No.1 on 09.07.2010, 09.08.2010 and 10.9.2010, respectively. He visited the O.P. No.1 for getting no objection certificate, but it was lingering on the matter on one pretext another. When again after some time, he went to the office of O.P. No.1, then he came to know that the O.P. No.1 has vacated its office, without giving any intimation as to where it has shifted. He got telephonic call from Ms. Rupal Patel, Executive of Kotak Mahindra Bank from landline No.022-61320300 and she told him that an amount of Rs.42,000/- is still outstanding against him. She also told him that Citi Financials have authorized the Kotak Mahindra Bank to recover the loan amount from him. He further stated that he had already paid the entire loan amount to the O.P. No.1 as per settlement and after six years, the Kotak Mahindra Bank had illegally raised the demand of an amount of Rs.42,000/-. The O.Ps. No.3 & 4 had also threatened him if he does not deposit the said amount then information regarding outstanding loan amount would be given to CIBIL and he would not be able to get loan from any other bank. He emailed the O.Ps. with regard to the payment of the loan amount as per settlement arrived at with the O.P. No.1. But in the reply to the said email, the O.Ps. denied having issued any settlement letter to him. On 16.5.2016, he again served upon a legal notice to the O.Ps., but they did not reply to the said legal notice. He again visited the office of the O.P. No.3 and requested it to hand over him No Objection Certificate and to clear the CIBIL status, but it refused to accede to his request. Hence, this complaint.

3.                On being put to notice, none appeared on behalf O.Ps. No.1, 3 & 4,           accordingly, they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated          05.08.2016 and 14.10.2016, respectively. On 15.11.2016, the present complaint against O.P. No.2 was dismissed as withdrawn by the learned      counsel for the complainant

4.                 On being called upon to do so, the learned counsel for the     complainant tendered affidavit of the complainant, Ex. C1, photocopies of    documents Ex. C2 to Ex.C10 and closed the evidence.

 

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone               through the record of the file carefully.

 

6.                In the email dated 10.05.2016, Ex.C8, written by Kotak Mahindra to Major Singh, it is stated that his account No.15322597 has been assigned to Kotak Mahindra Bank from Citi Corp Finance India Limited along with its right/title/security/interest and financial documents and they have acted as per the record forwarded to them by the assignors. The O.Ps. No.3 & 4 forwarded the details given by the complainant to the assignors and have received the feedback that settlement was offered for Rs.42,000/- and the letter shared by the complainant is not genuine. From the perusal of settlement letter No.20100706JP000413729 dated 09.07.2010, Ex.C4, it is evident that the Citi Financial Consumer Finance India Limited offered the complainant to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/-  in three installments. As per the said letter the complainant was to pay 1^st installment of Rs.10000/- on 09.07.2010, second installment of Rs.10,000/- on 09.08.2010, third installment of Rs.10,000/- on 09.09.2010. From the receipts No.11893 dated 09.07.2010, Ex. C5, receipt No.12259 dated 09.08.2010, Ex.C6, receipt No.12498 dated 10.09.2010, Ex.C6, it is evident that the complainant deposited the amount in three installments on the specific dates as mentioned on the settlement letter dated 09.07.2010. The settlement letter 09.07.2010, Ex.C4 has not been rebutted by the Citi Finance Consumer Finance India Limited. However, O.Ps. No.3 & 4 have alleged that the said document is not genuine but have failed to prove this fact by adducing any cogent and convincing evidence. From the record, it is borne out that the Citi Finance Consumer Finance India Limited, has assigned the account of the complainant to the Kotak Mahindra Bank along with its rights/title/security/interest and financial documents. It means it steps into the shoes of Citi Finance Consumer Finance India Limited.  Once, the complainant had already paid the loan amount to the Citi Finance Consumer Finance India Limited, as per settlement, then there was no occasion for the Kotak Mahindra Bank to raise any demand, rather it was its liability to issue No Objection Certificate to the complainant and also to inform the CIBIL that complainant has paid the loan amount as per the settlement arrived at with Citi Finance Consumer Finance India Limited and his name may be removed from the defaulter list. But the O.Ps. No.3 & 4 instead of doing so have wrongly raised the demand for payment of the outstanding amount, which amounts to deficiency in service. The O.Ps. No.3 & 4 are, thus, not only liable to issue the 'No Objection Certificate' to the complainant, but are also liable to pay compensation on account of mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant along with cost of litigation. Since, the account of the complainant was assigned to the O.Ps. No.3 & 4, therefore, the complaint filed against O.P. No.1 is liable to be dismissed being infructuous .  

7.                       In view of the aforesaid discussion, we dismiss the complaint v     against O.P. No.1 and partly allow the same against the O.Ps. No. 3 & 4.  The O.Ps. No.3 & 4 are directed in the following manner:-

1.                To issue ‘No Objection Certificate’ to the complainant and thereafter inform the CIBIL that complainant is no more defaulter and they have already issued the ‘No Objection Certificate’ to him and request to CIBIL that name of the complainant may be removed from the list of defaulters.      

 2.               To pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him.

3.                To pay Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses.

                             The O.Ps. No.3 & 4 are further directed to comply with the order within 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.   

    8.            The certified copies of this order be supplied to the parties forthwith,                          free of costs, as permissible under the rules and the file be indexed                     and consigned to Record Room.

          ANNOUNCED                                                                       (NEENA SANDHU)

          Dated: 13.02.2017                                                 PRESIDENT

 

 

                                                         (SHAVINDER KAUR)

                                                                               MEMBER.