Punjab

Rupnagar

CC/22/44

Balwinder Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Vikas Kumar Gupta

08 Dec 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ROPAR

 

                                               Consumer Complaint No.44 of 2022

                                              Date of institution: 04.03.2022

                                              Date of Decision: 08.12.2022

 

 

Balwinder Kumar aged about 59 years son of Som Dutt, resident of House No.3533/4, Ward No.10, Granthi Bagh Road, TEhsil & District Rupnagar 

…….Complainant

Versus

 

HDFC Bank, through its Manager, Bela Chowk, Rupnagar Tehsil & District Rupnagar.

…..Opposite Party

Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.

 

QUORUM

SH. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT.

                               MRS. RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER

 

PRESENT:

Sh. Chetan Kumar Gupta, Adv. counsel for complainant

Sh. Sumit Pasricha, Adv. for Opposite Party.

              
 

 ORDER

SH. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

 

The present order of ours will dispose of the above complaint filed under Consumer Protection Act, by the complainant against the Opposite Parties on the ground that the complainant had purchased four wheeler supercarry tempo bearing registration  No.PB65-At-9326 in the year 2018 and the same was financed by HDFC Bank, Branch Bela Road, Ropar. My account bearing No.6185622766 is of India Bank, Ropar and my loan installment of Rs.10,720/- per month was deducted from the above said bank. Due to COVID-19, the complainant was unable to deposit the installments of loan for the month of April and May 2020 whereas at that time, Rs.3,18,000/- is lying in my bank account. The car installment used to be paid by the bank was withdrawn from my account every month and deposited into his account whereas the complainant has the said current account. According to the instructions of the Reserve Bank, the bank did not withdraw the two month installment from the Indian Bank complainant's account, while the money was deposited in the complainant's account at that time. The complainant did not write anything to the bank about not withdrawing the installments. The loan installments of the complainant have been completed on 16.12.2021. My dealings with myself are over. When the complainant went to the bank to take the loan, he found that on 15.1.2022 he had withdrawn 5144/- from my account. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of O.P. the complainant has sought the following relief:-

1. The O.Ps. be directed to refund Rs.5144/- along with interest 
2. To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation.  

The complaint of the CC is signed and also verified.

2.        In reply, the O.P. has filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that the complaint is not legally maintainable; that this Hon’ble Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint; that the complainant had taken loan from the OP and as such the relation between the complainant and the OP is that of debtor and creditor and not that of consumer and service provider. On merits, it is stated that complainant approached the OP bank for loan facility lap and amount of Rs.3,04,814/- was financed to the borrowers/co applicant/guarantors and the same was disbursed to them.  A written loan agreement was executed between the parties, which was duly signed by the applicant. The case of the complainant is out of terms of loan, agreement as mentioned above which pertains to an Arbitration Clause. Thus, alleging no deficiency in service on their part, the O.Ps. has denied any deficiency in service on their part.

3.           The learned counsel for the complainant has closed the evidence after tendering certain documents. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OP has closed the evidence.  

4.           We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the file, carefully and minutely.

5.           The learned counsel for the parties have placed on record certain documents in support of their version. In this complaint there is a matter of very small amount of Rs.5144/-. From the perusal of the document Ex.C1, it reveals that RS.3,18,000/- was lying in the account of the complainant in the month of April and May 2020.  In reply, the OP has not mentioned even single word that why OP did deduct Rs.5144/- from the account of the complainant. Form the documents, this thing is very clear that an installment of loan has been finished on 16.12.2021 and dealing with OP was over. But despite this, the OP did not give the NOC to the complainant, which amounts deficiency in service on the part of the OP.       

6.  In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint with the direction to the OP to pay Rs.5144/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing the present complaint. The OP is further directed to pay a consolidated amount of Rs.11,000/- to the complainant. The OP is also directed to comply with the above said order within the period of 30 days from the date of receiving of certified copy of this order. Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The files be consigned to record room.

Announced

December 08, 2022

                                                                                                     (Ranjit Singh)

                                                                                                         President

                                                                                                      (Ranvir Kaur)

                                                                                                         Member