Haryana

Fatehabad

CC/93/2019

Mohit Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Rajbir Singh

02 May 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION FATEHABAD.                   

Complaint Case No.93 of 2019.

Date of Instt.:15.02.2019.

Date of Decision: 02.05.2023.

 

Mohit Kumar s/o Raj Kumar 352/16, Behind Tehsil Tohana District Fatehabad.

 

...Complainant

                    Versus

 

1.Branch Manager, HDFC Bank Branch Tohana District Fatehabad.

2.Branch Manager, HDFC Bank main Branch, Hisar.

 

          ...Opposite Parties.

 

          Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

 

 

Present:       Sh.Rajbir Singh, Advocate for complainant.

                   Sh.Amit Wadhera, Advocate for OPs.        

         

CORAM:        SH. RAJBIR SINGH, PRESIDENT.                             SMT.HARISHA MEHTA, MEMBER.                                              DR.K.S.NIRANIA, MEMBER.                                  

 

ORDER

SH. RAJBIR SINGH, PRESIDENT

 

                   Brief facts of the present complaint are that the complainant had taken a loan for two wheeler vehicle to the tune of Rs.35,000/- on simple interest @ 10 % per annum i.e. Rs.3000/-; that the complainant had already paid Rs.48,000/- in two installments of Rs.24,000/- each i.e. 13,000/- more than the principal amount of Rs.35,000/-; that the Ops have wrongly and illegally charged more amount violating the terms and conditions of the loan agreement; that the Ops bank have charged interest @ 22.55 % against the rules and regulations; that the Ops have illegally and without the permission of RBI taken the advance cheques and still are not returning the same despite receiving the excess amount towards the repayment of loan amount without providing the details thereof; that the Ops have neither returned the excess amount nor redressed the grievance of the complainant, therefore, the complainant had left with no option but to knock at the door of this Commission. The act and conduct of the Ops clearly amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part. Hence, this complaint. In evidence, the complainant has tendered affidavit Annexure C1 alongwith documents Annexure C2 to Annexure C16.

2.                The OPs appeared and filed their joint written statement to the complaint wherein several preliminary objections such as maintainability, cause of action, concealment of material facts and locus standi etc. have been taken.  It has been further submitted that the complainant had availed loan facility for two wheeler vehicle but he did not repay the installments and committed default and as per statement of account an amount of Rs.32328/- was due towards him on 03.04.2019 besides the future installment; that the loan was to be repaid as per the terms and conditions of the loan agreement because he himself has admitted that he had paid Rs.24,000/-  towards repayment of loan amount;  that the actual loan was Rs.40,131/- with interest @ 22.55 % which was to be repaid in 36 installments; that the complainant had approached the Ops bank to settle his dispute but he refused to sign the settlement letter and without accepting and signing the settlement note, no payment/demand draft can be accepted; that  the Ops have not charged the excess interest. Other contentions have been controvered and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. In evidence, the Ops have tendered documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R6.

3.                We have heard learned counsels for the parties and gone through the material available on the case file besides going through the written submissions submitted on behalf of the complainant.

4.                The fact regarding obtaining of loan for two wheeler vehicle by the complainant from Ops is not in dispute. Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the Ops have already received Rs.48,000/- including the excess amount of Rs.13,000/- against the actual principal amount of Rs.35,000/-  without supplying the details of the loan amount. It has been argued that the Ops have charged interest at higher side @ 22.55 % against the rules and regulations of RBI and further obtained advance cheques against the terms and conditions of the agreement and now, they are not returning the said back despite the fact that the loan amount has already been paid. In support of his learned counsel for the complainant has placed on record case laws titled as Arun Bhatiya Versus HDFC Bank & Ors. decided by  Hon’ble Apex Court  in Civil Appeal Nos. 5204-5205 of 2022 on 08.08.2022, Jasmier Singh Vs. The Branch Manager, Fullerton India Credit decided by  Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.T.Chandigarh on 22.05.2019 in Appeal No.65 of 2018 and Guru Nanak Engineering Works Versus Reserve Bank of India  decided by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CWP No.19472 of 2020 on 09.08.2022.

5.                          Per contra, it has been argued that the complainant himself has committed default in making the installments, therefore, he himself has violated the terms and conditions of the loan agreement. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the Ops drew the attention of this Commission towards the hypothecation agreement dated 14.12.16 Annexure R2 & Annexure R3. It has been further argued that both the parties are bound by the terms and conditions of the agreement. In support of his contentions he has placed reliance of case laws titled as Bharathi Knitting Co. Versus DHL Worldwide Express Courier Division of Airfreight Ltd. decided by Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.9057 of 1996 on 09.05.1996 and Nitin Vashisth and Gagan Vashisth  Versus Central Bank of India 2013 (3) CPJ 679. 

6.                          The arguments submitted on behalf of the Ops have weight because both the parties are bound by the terms and conditions and the fact regarding execution of an agreement between the parties is not disputed. Strange enough that on one hand the complainant is not denying the execution of agreement and on the other hand has contested the terms and conditions of the agreement after committing default, as shown in statement of the account of complainant, in repayment of the loan amount. Once the loan amount is disbursed to any person at a fixed rate of interest with certain terms and conditions in the shape of agreement, then no one can be given permission to go beyond the same, therefore, at this stage, the complainant cannot dispute the terms and conditions of the agreement. Annexure R5, is the letter dated 05.01.2017 issued to the complainant by the Ops whereby he was asked to make the total amount of Rs.45705.63/- on account of loan taken for two wheeler vehicle but despite that he did not clear the loan amount and even committed default in repayment. It is a settled law that he who seeks equity must do equity with others but in the present case the complainant himself has committed default in making the payment of loan and on the other hand trying to take undue advantage of benevolent provisions of Consumer Protection Act. The case laws, relied upon by learned counsel for the complainant, are not applicable to the case in hand and the same are being distinguished. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the complainant has failed to prove the allegations leveled in his complaint.            

7.                On the basis of above mentioned discussion, we are of the considered opinion that there was no deficiency in service at all or any unfair trade practice, on the part of ops/bank, as alleged, so as to make it liable to any extent in this matter. Hence, the complaint is dismissed in view of the facts and circumstances stated above.  Both the parties are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of cost as per rules.  This order be uploaded, forthwith, on the website of this Commission as per rules for the perusal of the parties. File be consigned to record room, as per rules, after due compliance.

 

Announced in open Commission.                                                            Dated:02.05.2023

                                     

 

                                                                  

                   (K.S.Nirania)                    (Harisha Mehta)              (Rajbir Singh)                                                  Member               Member                            President