DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

                  Complaint  Case No : 428 of 2011

Date of Institution:  27.07.2011

Date of  Decision  :  21.10.2011

[1]  Kanwal Ohri s/o Late Sh.H.C.Ohri, r/o #379, Sector 7, Panchkula. 

[2]  Meena Ohri w/o Kanwal Ohri, r/o #379, Sector 7, Panchkula. 

[3]  Gaurav Ohri s/o Kanwal Ohri, r/o #379, Sector 7, Panchkula. 

 ….…Complainants

V E R S U S

[1]  HDFC Bank Limited, Business Banking “P” Wing, 4^th Floor, Tax Centre, 26A, Narayan Properties, Chandiwali, Andheri [East], Mumbai, through its Chairman/Managing Director.

[2]  HDFC Bank Limited, Plot No. 28, Industrial Area, Ph-I, Chandigarh, through its Branch Manager/ Incharge.

[3]  HDFC Bank Limited, Plot No. 28, Industrial Area, Ph-I, Chandigarh through its representative/ Agent Sh.Sanjeev Sharma.

.…..Opposite Parties

CORAM:   SH.P.D.GOEL                     PRESIDENT

         SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL       MEMBER

         DR.(MRS).MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA  MEMBER

Argued by: Sh.Neeraj Sobti, Counsel for Complainants.

Sh.Sandeep Suri, Counsel for OPs.

PER DR.(MRS).MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA,MEMBER

          Succinctly put, the Complainants had availed loan against their property (#379, Sector 7, Panchkula) from GE Money Financial Services Limited for a sum of Rs.47,66,000/- @13.23% p.a. and for a sum of Rs.15,04,000/- @ 12.56% p.a. OP No.3 approached the Complainants in June, 2010, and allured them that OPs No.1 & 2 would take over their original loan @11% p.a. and that they (Complainants) had to pay 2% towards foreclosure charges over the total outstanding loan amount with GE Money and thereafter, their original title deeds, deposited with GE Money, shall be received by OP Nos. 1 & 2 on their behalf. Believing the version of OP No.3, Complainants gave their consent for taking loan from OPs No.1 & 2. Thereafter, OP No.3 informed them that as per verification, they had to pay a lump-sum amount of Rs.61,36,000/- i.e. (Rs.46,70,000/- & Rs.14,66,000/-) to GE Money including 2% foreclosure charges. On 17.07.2010, OP No.3 informed the Complainants that OP No.1 & 2, on the basis of verification from GE Money, sanctioned a loan of Rs.88,00,000/-, out of which Rs.61,36,000/- would be disbursed in favour of GE Money towards closure of their loan accounts and the balance amount of Rs.26,64,000/- would be disbursed to them (Complainants) directly. OP No.3 further took Cheque No. 015350, dated 17.07.2010 for a sum of Rs.97,064/- from the Complainants towards 1% processing charges including service taxes i.e. Rs.9,064/- for a loan amount of Rs.88.00 lacs. It was alleged on 12.8.2010, OP No.3 informed that the OP No.1 & 2 sent two pay orders amounting to Rs.46,70,000/- & Rs.14,46,000/- (total Rs.61,36,000/-) in favour of GE Money, but GE Money refused to accept the same and was demanding 4% foreclosure charges over the due amount from the OP No.1 & 2. At this, the Complainants requested the OP No.3 to cancel the loan agreement (Ann.C-2) and refund Rs.97,064/- received towards processing fee vide Annexure C-1. Thereafter, vide letter dated 1.9.2010, the OP No.1 & 2 cancelled the loan vide Ann.C-5, but did not refund the processing charges. Hence, this complaint.   

2]        Notice of the complaint was sent to OPs seeking its version of the case.

3]        OPs in its joint reply pleaded that since the Complainants were getting a better rate of interest, they applied for the loan. The Complainants were interested in transferring of their loan from GE Money Financial Services Ltd. to OP Bank. It was denied that Complainants were told that GE Money shall only charge 2% as foreclosure charges. As per the instructions of the Complainants and for the purpose of the take over of the said loan; a cheque was prepared out of the total loan amount sanctioned by the OPs in favour of GE Money and the remaining amount was to be paid into the Complainants’ account. It was asserted that as per the terms and conditions of the financer, the Complainants were liable to pay processing charges amounting to Rs.97,064/-. The replying OPs had completed all the requirements, as were required to be done on their part, for the disbursal of the loan. However, the Complainants refused to accept the same and hence, the Bank had no option, but to cancel the loan. All other material contentions of the complaint were controverted. Pleading that there was no deficiency in service on his part, a prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint.

4]        Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

5]        We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and have also perused the record.

6]       The contention of the complainants in this complaint is that the OPs first of all negligently/wrongly sanctioned the loan in their favour without proper verification from G.E.Money Financial Services Ltd. and then unlawfully withheld the processing charges (Annexure C-1 to C-3) paid by them to the OPs, whereas the disbursement of the loan has been refused (Annexure C-4 to C-6). 

7]        On the other hand, the OPs averred that the loan was processed as per the instructions of the complainants and it was they, who had refused to accept the loan facility. They further contended that they had spent enough time and money for the purpose of processing the said loan, so the complainants were rightly liable to pay the charges for the same and had denied for any type of entitlement of the complainants to get the same money refunded.   

8]        From the averments made by both the parties and going into the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a matter of record that though the processing fee was paid by the complainants to get the loan sanctioned, it is a part of the loan agreement, yet Clause No.4 of the Loan Agreement at Page No.12 has mentioned as below:-

“Disbursement: ……..The Date of Disbursement shall be the date of delivery of the cheque by the Bank to the Borrower or the date on which the funds are transferred to the account of the Borrower, whichever is earlier and interest on the Loan shall being to accrue from the date of disbursement.  Any charges relating to the disbursement of the loan in the aforesaid manner shall be borne by the Borrower.”  

9]        Moreover, the complainant has placed cogent evidence by way of Loan Agreement (Clause No.4 under the Heading Disbursement) as well as Annexures C-2 & C-4, which proves that it was the OPs’ responsibility/liability to adjust the initial loan of the complainants with G.E.Money Financial Services Ltd.  Certainly, the OP Bank took up the responsibility while entering into Loan Agreement with the complainants, so rightly they have failed to make adjustment with G.E.Money Financial Services Ltd. as promised.  It was due to the fault of OPs and the circumstances created by them only that the complainants were compelled to get the loan agreement cancelled.

10]       In view of the foregoings, we are of the considered opinion that the complaint must succeed and it is accordingly allowed. The OPs are directed to refund the amount of Rs.97,064/- to the complainants and Rs.10,000/- as compensation & litigation costs, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt copy of this order; failing which they shall be liable to pay the amount of Rs.97,064/- along with interest @12% p.a. from 20.7.2010 till its actual realization besides paying Rs.10,000/- as compensation & litigation costs.     

11]       Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.