Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/227/2020

Sukhdev Raj - Complainant(s)

Versus

Fullerton India Credit Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

PK Kukreja & Anshul Kukreja

29 Dec 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/227/2020
Date of Institution	:	21/07/2020
Date of Decision	:	29/12/2023

 

Sukhdev Raj aged about 53 years S/o Sh. Jagan Nath Mehta, R/o H.No.2363, Sector 27-C, Chandigarh.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

1. Fullerton India Credit Co. Ltd., through its Managing Director, Registered office at 3^rd Floor No.165, Megh Towers, PH Road, Maduravoyal, Chennai-600095.
2. Fullerton India Credit Co. Ltd., through its Branch Manager/Incharge, SCO No.1263-1268, Madhya Marg, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh-160018.

… Opposite Parties

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                

ARGUED BY	:	Sh.Devinder Kumar, Advocate proxy for Sh.P.K.Kukreja, Advocate for Complainant alongwith complainant in person.
	:	Sh.Kartik, Advocate proxy for Sh.Sandeep Suri, Advocate for OPs.

 

Per Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member

1.      Averments are that the complainant personally approached OP No. 2 and enquired his eligibility for loan. In view of the salary and age of the complainant, the OPs assured to extend loan facility of Rs.4.00 lacs to the Complainant against the requirement of excess loan amount. The OPs committed to charge interest @ 11.99% from the Complainant being salaried person and the OPs demonstrated the said fact from their official website (AnnexureC-1). After lot of efforts the OPs supplied statement of accounts to the Complainant till 22.04.2019 (Annexure C-2). The OPs charged a sum of Rs.15,647/- on 23.12.2017 and an additional amount of Rs.25,479.41. Total an amount of Rs.41,126.41 under different heads was wrongly charged. Even the alleged dishonoured cheques were not returned to the Complainant. The said amount is to be reduced from the loan amount of Rs.3,79,441/-, thus the effective disbursed amount comes to Rs.3,64,160/-. The OPs have fixed equal monthly installments and had increased the rate of interest from time to time without any previous intimation about the change of interest in the loan account at multiple intervals. The rate of interest was not reduced and was increased. The rate of interest has been increased from 11.99% to 22%. However, the said increase of interest is not payable. Further, other components of spread including operating cost was altered frequently against the applicable laws. The Complainant had paid a sum of Rs.1,52,764/- upto 22.04.2019. The complainant has paid around Rs.1,50,000/- to the collecting agents of the OPs/banking transactions after 22.04.2019 but the OPs have not issued receipts or statement of accounts for the same. The OPs had collected higher EMI amount but has not adjusted the same in the principal amount for the reasons best known to the OPs. Similarly, entire amount to the Opposite Parties and are at higher side. The OPs have not shared EMI amount with the Complainant consisting of interest and principal amount components. The Complainant enquired status of higher rate of interest, advance interest, advance EMI, disbursement of loan of Rs.51,193/-, increase of interest and installments etc. from the OPs but till date the OPs have not given any satisfactory reply to the Complainant. The accounts of the complainant are not properly maintained and higher rate of interest/ financial charges have been demanded and claimed from the Complainant. Hence, is the present consumer complaint.
2.     OPs contested the consumer complaint, filed their reply and stated that the loan was disbursed on 23.12.2017. The present complaint is filed on 20.07.2020. The present complaint is barred by limitation, as the limitation is 2 years. It is further stated that the rate of interest keeps changing from time to time. The rate of interest as agreed between the parties is dependent upon various factors. That each contract has a rate of interest which is unique to the contract. It is also stated that the rate of interest from the beginning continues to be 22% on reducing basis. It wrong and denied that the rate of interest was on a floating rate of interest and was required to be either increased or decreased. OPs also took the stand that, it is wrong and denied that the rate of interest has been increased from 11.99% to 22% as has been alleged. The payment which have been made to the opposite parties is contained in the statement of account. On these lines, the case is sought to be defended.
3.     No rejoinder was filed by the complainant.
4.     Parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
5.     We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and gone through the record of the case.
6.     On perusal of complaint, it is gathered that the main grievance of the complainant is that the OPs have charged rate of interest @ 22% per annum, on the loan availed by him, though they displayed on their website that the interest rates to be charged @ 11.99% per annum.
7.     On perusal of the reply of they OPs, it is observed that they have reproduced a part of the agreement only. The OPs have not adduced copy of the loan agreement duly signed by the parties for our perusal. The complainant is an illiterate person and in the absence of non-submission of original agreement or certified copy of agreement by the OPs, we are constrained to believe the version of the complainant that he has singed the blank forms and the contents of the same were neither shared with or explained to the complainant. Even otherwise, the OPs have failed to adduce any guidelines of RBI, wherein they can charge interest @ 22% per annum from the complainant. We are also not convinced, with the argument of the OPs about charging of Rs.4095/- towards IHO charges for unlimited teleconsultation with Swiss train doctors, diet fit packages etc., from an illiterate/gullible consumer complainant.
8.     In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the OPs have indulged in unfair trade practice by charging higher interest @ 22% and by charging of Rs.4095/- towards IHO.
9.     In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly partly allowed. OPs are directed as under :-

1. Work out statement of account afresh by keeping the interest rates @ 12% per annum on reducing balance basis.
2. to reverse the entry of Rs.4095/- in the account statement, charged towards IHO.
3. to pay an amount of ₹15000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him.
4. to pay ₹7000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

10.     This order be complied with by the OPs within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amount mentioned at Sr.No.(iii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(i), (ii) & (iv) above.
11.     Pending miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed of.
12.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

			Sd/-
29/12/2023			[Pawanjit Singh]
Ls			President
			Sd/-
			[Surjeet Kaur]
			Member
			Sd/-
			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
			Member