Haryana

Sonipat

CC/268/2015

CHANCHAL MAADAN S/O LATE BANSI LAL MAADAN - Complainant(s)

Versus

FULLERTON INDI CREDIT CO. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

MOHIT KAMRA

24 Feb 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SONEPAT.

 

Complaint No.268 of 2015                             Instituted on:10.08.2015

                                Date of order:24.02.2016

 

 

Chanchal Maadan son of late Sh. Bansi Lal Maadan, r/o H.No.122, Tara Nagar, Sonepat.

 

                                      ..Complainant.

 

                   Versus

 

Fullerton India Credit Co. Ltd., 3^rd Floor, old no.307, New no.165, Megh Towers, Poonmalee High road, Maduravoyal, Chennai, Tamilnadu through its authorized signatory through its Branch Manager Sonepat Branch Subhash Chowk, Sonepat.

                                           ..Respondent.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

BEFORE-    NAGENDER SINGH-PRESIDENT.

PRABHA DEVI-MEMBER.

D.V. RATHI-MEMBER.

 

Argued by: Sh. Mohit Kamra, Adv. for complainant.

 

           Sh. Anil Sidher Adv. for respondent.

           (DEFENCE STRUCK OFF VIDE ORDER DT 18.12.2015)

 

O R D E R

 

          The present complaint has been filed by the complainant against the respondent alleging therein that he borrowed personal loan of Rs.one lac from the respondent on 16.10.2007 for a period of 30 months w.e.f. 4.11.2007 to 4.4.2010 and the complainant has paid 30 installments of Rs.4855/- each in time and after it, the loan was closed.  The complainant has applied for a fresh loan form ICICI Bank to buy a new vehicle and then it was informed that his name is located in Credit Information Bureau India Ltd. and it was also revealed that two other loans are shown pending in the name of the complainant. It was shocking for the complainant as he never borrowed the said loan from the respondent and due to this wrongful act of the respondent, the complainant has suffered mental agony and harassment.  So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        In the present case, ample opportunities were given to the respondent to file the reply. But no reply was filed by the respondent and due to this, defence of the respondent was struck off vide order dated 18.12.2015.

3.       We have heard the arguments advanced by both the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also gone through the entire relevant record placed on the case file very carefully.

4.        The present complaint has been filed by the complainant for removal of his name from Credit Information Bureau India Ltd. It is also submitted that the complainant has applied for a fresh loan from ICICI Bank to buy a new vehicle and then it was informed that his name is located in Credit Information Bureau India Ltd. and it was also revealed that two other loans are shown pending in the name of the complainant. It was shocking for the complainant as he never borrowed the said loan from the respondent and due to this wrongful act of the respondent, the complainant has suffered mental agony and harassment.

          In the present case, defence of the respondent was struck off vide order dated 18.12.2015, meaning thereby to some extent they have admitted the grievances of the complainant. In our view, when no loan amount of the respondent is due against the complainant, then why they have put the name of the complainant in Credit Information Report and in this report, the complainant has been shown as defaulter of the respondent and it must have caused unnecessary mental agony and harassment to the complainant and further, in our view, that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.

          The complainant by way of present complaint has claimed Rs.20 lacs as compensation, which in our view is on a very higher side.  However, we hereby direct the respondent to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.ten thousand) for rendering deficient services, for causing unnecessary mental agony, harassment and further to pay Rs.2000/- (Rs.two thousand) under the head of litigation expenses.  The respondent is also directed to get remove the name of the complainant from CIBIL (Central Information Bureau (I) Ltd.

          With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of costs.

              File be consigned after due compliance.

 

(Prabha Wati) (D.V.Rathi)           (Nagender Singh)           

Member,DCDRF, Member, DCDRF,          President, DCDRF

Sonepat.      Sonepat.                Sonepat.

 

Announced 24.02.2016