BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.71/2018

DATED ON THIS THE 18^th May 2018

      Present:  1) Sri. H.M.Shivakumara Swamy

B.A., LLB., - PRESIDENT  

                     2) Sri. Devakumar.M.C.                  

                                                B.E., LLB., PGDCLP   - MEMBER

Sri. Devakumar,M.C.

Member

1.     The complainant filed the complaint under section 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986, against the opposite party, alleging unfair trade practice and seeking direction to pay compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- towards mental agony, financial hardship and loss suffered with other reliefs.
2.     The complainant availed loan, by executing loan documents in favour of the opposite party and promised to repay the loan amount with interest, in 48 EMI’s, starting from 16.06.2017.  The rate of interest being very high, decided to foreclose the loan account. On demand for a sum of Rs.3,22,077/- to fore close the loan account, despite of payment of six EMI’s amounting to Rs.67,776/-, alleged the unfair trade practice and filed the complaint seeking reliefs.
3.    In spite of service of notice, the opposite party remained absent, hence placed exparte.
4.     The complainant filed affidavit in lieu of his evidence and relied on several documents.  Heard the oral submissions.  Perusing the material on record, posted for orders.
5.     The points arose for our consideration are:-

1. Whether the complainant establishes the unfair trade practice by the opposite party, for demand of foreclosure charges, interest and penalty on account of pre-closure of loan account and thereby he is entitled for the relief sought?
2. What Order?

6.    Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1 :-  In the negative.

Point No.2:- As per final order

:: R E A S O N S ::

7.    Point No.1:- The complainant, who was intended to avail loan from financial institution, came in contact with an agent of opposite party, who promised him to get loan at lesser rate of interest.  On execution of relevant loan agreement documents, the opposite party sanctioned a loan of Rs.l3,13,724/-, but paid Rs.2,94,489/- only, by deducting a sum of Rs.19,235/- and levied an interest at 30% per annum.
8.    Aggrieved by the levy of higher rate of interest, requested for pre-closure of loan account.  The opposite party refused to close the loan account, until completion of six months loan period.  A sum of Rs.67,776/- has been paid towards six EMIs.
9.    Further, as against the balance amount of Rs.2,91,667/-, service charges at the rate of 7% and GST at 18%, total amounting to Rs.24,091/-, apart from interest for January month at Rs.6,319/- has been collected (i.e, a total sum of Rs.3,22,077/-).  Thereby, the complainant suffered to the extent of Rs.30,410/- for just six months.  Hence, the aggrieved complainant filed the complaint and sought for the reliefs.
10. On perusal of the material on record, it is true that the complainant, availed a loan from opposite party, by executing relevant loan documents in favour of the opposite party.  On realising the levy of higher rate of interest on the loan amount, decided to fore-close the loan account by making payment of balance amount.  Even after receipt of Rs.67,776/- towards EMI amount for six months, the opposite party demanded a total sum of Rs.3,22,077/- after calculating the service charges and GST on the balance loan amount towards pre-closure.  Subsequently, opposite party issued the loan clearance certificate on 17.03.2018.  The amount demanded towards loan amount has been paid by the complainant, without any protest and now filed the complaint, seeking reliefs, which is not justified.  As such, we opine the complainant is not entitled for any reliefs.  Hence, the point No.1 is answered in the negative.
11. Point No.2:- With the above observations in point No.1, we proceed to pass the following order:-

:: O R D E R ::

1. The complaint is hereby dismissed.
2. Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules.

(