Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 637.
Instituted on : 26.11.2019.
Decided on : 10.11.2021.
Chetna Age 32 years w/o Sh.Vijay R/o H.No.806/24, Netaji Nagar, Circular Road, Near Old ITI, Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Fullerton India Credit Company Ltd., Regd. Office at Megh Towers, 3rd Floor, Old No.307, New No.165, Poonamallee High Road, Maduravoyal, Chennai through its M.D.
- Fullerton India Credit Co. Ltd., Branch office at Babu Asharam Market, Chhotu Ram Chowk, Rohtak through its Manager.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Naresh Kumar, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Naveen Chaudhary, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant with the averments that complainant had applied for personal loan to the opposite parties in May 2018 and after verification of all the requisite documents and CIBIL score, the opposite parties sanctioned the personal loan of Rs.324299/- only and she was to pay Rs.12250/- as monthly instalment for three years for repayment of loan. Opposite party told the complainant that the rate of interest would be charged @ 14% p.a. as per the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India in parity with other Nationalized Bank and financial institutions and assured the complainant that on completion of all the formalities and disbursement of loan, the letter shall be sent at her residential address giving all the details/information. At the time of sanction of the loan several printed and blank papers were got signed by the opposite parties from the complainant under the pretext of completing the formalities and the complainant was not allowed to go through the contents of the same and the contents of documents were not read over to the complainant in any manner. Since thereafter the complainant kept on requesting the opposite parties to provide her the details of loan agreement including the details of rate of interest being charged on the loan amount so availed by her but the opposite parties told the complainant that it will take time as per usual practice and the matter had been sent to the H.O. and as and when everything will be checked at the end of Head office, the complainant will be intimated accordingly about all the details. After believing the words of opposite parties complainant kept on paying the installments of loan amount regularly. When the complainant approached the opposite parties and got the account statement issued, she was stunned to know that the opposite parties were charging the rate of interest as 38.50% per annum over the amount of loan which was not as per agreed rate of interest i.e. @ 14% p.a. rather quite excessive, exorbitant, quite unreasonable and against the guidelines issued by the Reserve bank of India from time to time regarding the rate of interest charged by the financial institutions. The opposite parties have cheated the complainant and committed a fraud upon her as she was never allowed to go through the documents. As such there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be restrained from charging the interest @ 38.50% p.a. over the loan amount and either to refund the said amount adjusted by them towards that interest calculated @ 38.50% and to charge interest @ 14% p.a. as agreed prior to sanction of loan and further to overhaul the account of complainant accordingly and not to charge the unreasonable and exorbitant rate of interest, to declare the documents of loan agreement as illegal, void and not binding upon the rights of complainant, interest clause if any with regard to charging the interest @ 38.50% be struck down and be declared illegal and void and also to pay a sum of Rs.100000/- on account of compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs.25000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. Notice of the present complaint was sent to the opposite parties who appeared and filed their written reply submitting therein that in May 2018, the complainant approached the respondent company and applied for a loan. The complainant was made to understand all the terms and conditions of the loan agreement to be executed including various charges and interest. The respondent company further told the complainant at that time that documentation fee, stamp duty, insurance premium etc. shall be deducted from the sanctioned loan amount to which the complainant agreed and duly executed the loan agreement etc. Thereafter, her loan of Rs.324299/- was sanctioned and the respondent company disbursed an amount of Rs.315000/- on 11.05.2018 after deducting documentation fee etc. The tenure of the loan was 61 months and loan was to be repaid in 60 monthly installments of Rs.12246/- each commencing from 04.07.2018 to 04.06.2023 apart from Rs.8324/- towards pre-EMI i.e. interest from 11.05.2018 to 04.06.2018. Now the complainant by filing this complaint is trying to pressurize the respondent-company and wants to get the rate of interest reduced which was finalized and agreed at the time of execution of loan agreement. On merits, it is denied that the officials of the answering respondents had told the complainant that the interest rate was to be charged @ 14% p.a.. It is further denied that at the time of sanction of loan, several printed and blank papers were got signed by the answering respondents under any pretext or that the complainant was not allowed to go through the contents of the same. It is further submitted that the complainant is an educated lady who had executed the loan agreement alongwith other documents duly filled after duly reading and understanding the same. However, she wants to take the undue advantage by simply alleging that the contents of documents were not read over by her. It is submitted that the answering respondents have charged interest as per the loan agreement executed by & between the complainant and answering respondents and that too in consonance with the rules and regulations issued by Reserve Bank of India. All the other contents of the complainant were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite parties prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. Both the parties led evidence in support of his case.
4. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4, document Ex.C5 in additional evidence and closed his evidence on 09.08.2021. On the other hand, ld. counsel for opposite parties tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1/1 to Ex.R1/5 and has closed his evidence on 18.11.2020.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
6. In the present case it is not disputed that the complainant had taken loan from the opposite parties and the repayment of same is also not disputed. The grievance of the complainant is that opposite party has charged interest @ 38.50% against the agreed rate of interest @ 14% p.a.
A comparison to the rate list of personal loan has been placed on record by the complainant as Ex.C1. In this document interest rate of different banks has been mentioned. At the time of arguments, one more document i.le. “Annexure JNA” is again placed on record, as per which fullerton India Personal Loan interest is 11.99%. As per Ex.C1 also, the rate of interest is 11.99% We have also perused the loan agreement placed on record by the opposite party as Ex.R1/1, dated 10th May 2018 signed by both the parties. Rate of interest has not been mentioned in the loan agreement but in the next document i.e. in loan summary, hand written rate of interest is written as 38.50%, which is on very higher side. No such excessive rate is ever fixed by the RBI. We have also perused that as per advertisement made on different web sites of different private as well as Govt. banks maximum rate of interest is 12% to 14% against the personal loan. As per application form Ex.R1/2, the complainant is a Govt. Employee and is working in Pt. Neki Ram Sharma Govt. college Rohtak which is proved from their own document. As per the written arguments, opposite party has submitted that the flat rate of interest in the present case is 25% but this fact has not been mentioned in written statement. Till date complainant is making repayment of loan. The rate of interest as mentioned on the website of opposite party is 14% p.a. whereas they are charging 38.50% which is on very higher side. Ld. Counsel for the complainant has also placed reliance upon the judgment dated 22.05.2019 of Hon’ble State Commission, U.T.Chandigarh titled as Jasmer Singh Vs. The Branch Manager, fullerton, which is fully applicable on the facts and circumstances of the case.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties not to charge interest @ 38.50% p.a. over the loan amount and to charge interest @ 14% p.a. on the loan amount and to refund the difference of amount of interest already charged in excess from the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of charging the excessive interest on the installments till its realization and also to charge the interest @14% in future installments. Opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs.10000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision, to adjust the alleged awarded amount in future installments and to refund the remaining amount (if any) to the complainant after adjustment of loan amount.
8. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
10.11.2021.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
...............................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
