PER:
Charanjit Singh, President.
1 The present complaint has been received from the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Amritsar by the order of the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Punjab, Chandigarh for its disposal.
2 The complainant has filed the present complaint by invoking the provisions of Consumer Protection Act under Section 12 and 13 against the opposite parties on the allegations that the complainant had obtained a gold loan facility from the opposite parties against from the opposite parties against pledge of her gold jewelry in the year 2016. The complainant was told that all the documents and formalities can also be conducted by the complainant with the opposite party No. 1 at Amritsar. It was further narrated to the complainant that the EMIs of the said loan facilities can also be paid to the opposite party No. 1 and accordingly the complainant started operating her gold loan account. Since the advancement of the loan the complainant is regularly paying the EMIs of said loan. Now the complainant has found that EMIs of said loan are so high and as such the complainant requested the opposite parties that she wants to settle the said loan account in one stroke payment. All the times the complainant was dealt by the concerned officers of the opposite parties and every time they had been assuring the complainant that she can settle the said loan account by one time payment but till date no statement of account of the said loan account has been provided to the complainant by the opposite parties. The complainant many times approached the opposite parties and requested to supply the copy of statement of account. She also served a legal notice upon the opposite party, even then the copy of statement of account has not been provided to the complainant by the opposite parties. The complainant is ready to settle the said loan account through demand draft or any other mode of payment but neither the opposite parties are supplying the statement of account of the loan account nor they are accepting the payment from the complainant. The complainant is ready to settle her loan account in one stroke payment, but the opposite parties are not adhering to the genuine request of the complainant. The complainant has prayed that the following relief may be granted to the complainant.
(a) The opposite parties may kindly be directed to provide up to date true statement of account of loan account to the complainant.
(b) The opposite party may kindly be directed to accept the full and final payment from the complainant and to release the gold ornaments of the complainant after receiving the full and final payment from the complainant.
(c) A compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- may kindly be awarded in favour of complainant and against the opposite party.
(d) The litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 22,000/- may kindly be awarded to the complainant.
3 Notice was issued to the opposite parties and opposite parties appeared through counsel and hotly contested the complaint and filed written version by interalia pleadings that the complainant has availed gold loan from HDFC Bank having its Branch at Pritampura, Delhi as per the documents place on record. As such, no transaction with respect to gold loan has taken place within territorial jurisdiction of this commission, as such, the present complaint is barred for want of territorial jurisdiction and same is liable to be dismissed. The present complaint is an abuse of process of law and same is liable to be dismissed as matter in dispute is not covered under consumer Protection Act. The complainant has not come to this commission with clean hands and has suppressed various material and true facts from the knowledge of this commission. The complainant is chronic defaulter of the HDFC Bank and she has availed Auto Loan and she is running commercial activities as she has availed four Nos. of loan from HDFC Bank bearing Loan account No. 32284771, 32284422, 32285029 and 32284900 for the purpose of four cars make Fiat Linea Emotion and she is running a commercial traveling agency and all the cars are being used by the complainant for commercial purposes and same have been provided by the complainant to H.K. Clerk Hotel, Ranjit Avenue Amritsar. The complainant never deposited her EMIs with the opposite parties and huge amount of Rs. 20,17,843/- stands due towards the complainant as defaulted amount and she has not disclosed this fact before this commission intentionally, as such present complaint is liable to be dismissed. The present complaint is malafide one and filed in order to wriggle out from her legal liability and with motive to extract money from the opposite parties by way of filing present false and frivolous complaint. The complainant is estopped by her own act and conduct from filing the present complaint against the opposite parties. There is no deficiency in service of any kind on the part of the opposite parties, hence the present complaint is liable to be dismissed for want of cause of action. The complainant fails to maintain his loan account as per the Banking Discipline and norms and this fact has been intentionally not disclosed by him at the time of filing the present complaint and same is liable to be dismissed on ground of concealment of material facts. As per told loan application form which was duly signed and endorsed by the complainant herself shows that she is permanent resident f 35/75, road No. 72, Punjabi Bagh, West, New Delhi. This fact has not been disclosed by he complainant that she has availed four auto loans from the HDFC Bank and she is running commercial activities under the name and style of Torque Cars Private Ltd., Patel Nagar, Ghaziabad and she is defaulter of HDFC Bank and amount of Rs. 20,17,843/- stands due towards the complainant as defaulted amount in the aforesaid four loan accounts. Prior to that all the terms and conditions of the loan application form were duly read over and explained to the complainant in English as well as in vernacular language. The complainant after going through all the terms and conditions of the gold loan application and admitting the same to be true and correct, put her signature over the same out of her free will and consent. This gold loan application was duly signed by the complainant at Delhi, therefore, gold loan was sanctioned to the complainant. As per the clause No. 21 of the loan application form which is reproduced as under:-
“In addition to any general lien or similar right to which the bank as banker may be entitled by law, practice, custom, or otherwise, the bank may at any time and without notice to me/us combine or consolidate all or any of the my/our accounts with and liabilities to the bank and set of or transfer any sum or sums standing to the credit of anyone or more of such accounts in or towards satisfaction of any of my/our liabilities to the bank or any other account or in any other respect, whether such liabilities be actual or contingent, primary or collateral and several or joint. The bank may also exercise lien or any gold security in respect of dues in relation to any other accounts held by me/ or any of us with the Bank”
As per bank policy, HDFC Bank has created a lien/ charge over the gold ornaments on the complainant and it is a legal duty/ obligation on the part of the complainant to repay the entire loan outstanding stands due towards her. Statement of account was duly provided to her by the bank officials. Numbers of times requests were made by the officials of the bank to the complainant that she should maintain her loan accounts as per the financial discipline of the bank but she totally failed to maintain her loan account and an amount of Rs. 20,17,843/- stands due towards her defaulted amount. No notice as alleged by the complainant has ever been received by the opposite parties. The complainant was timely intimated by the opposite parties that she should deposit the entire defaulted amount in her loan accounts but she has failed to do so. The opposite parties have denied the other contents of the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the same.
4 To prove his case, Ld. counsel for the complainant has placed on record affidavit of complainant Ex. C-1 alongwith documents i.e. copy of legal notice Ex. C-1, Adhar Card Ex. C2/A, copy of receipt Ex. C-3, Ex. C-4, copy of sanction order Ex. C-5 to Ex. C-11, copy of legal notice Ex. C-12 and closed the evidence. On the other hands, Ld. counsel for the opposite parties tendered in evidence affidavit of Rajendra Parshad Assit. Manager Ex. OP1, 2/1, copies of statement of account Ex. OP1,2/2 to Ex. OP1,2/7, gold application form Ex. OP1, 2/8 and closed the evidence.
5 We have heard the Ld. counsel for the complainant and opposite parties and have gone through the record on the file.
6 In the present case it is not disputed by the parties that the complainant has availed gold loan from the opposite party. The case of the complainant is that she wants to make the payment of gold loan one time and the opposite party is not providing the loan account. On the other hands, the case of the opposite parties is that they have already provided the account statement. The opposite party has taken objection that complainant has availed gold loan from HDFC Bank having its Branch at Pritampura, Delhi as per the documents place on record. As such, no transaction with respect to gold loan has taken place within territorial jurisdiction of this Commission, as such, the present complaint is barred for want of territorial jurisdiction and same is liable to be dismissed. Perusal of loan documents C-3, C-4, C-5, C-6, C-7, C-8, C-9, C-10, C-11 show that the complainant has availed the gold loan from the Branch office of the opposite party at Pritam Pura Delhi. The Gold Loan application form dated 10.4.2013 Ex. OP1,2/8 shows that the correspondence address of the complainant has been mentioned as 35/72 road No. 72, Punjabi Bagh West New Delhi and this information has been given by the complainant himself to the opposite parties as the form Ex. OP1,2/8 is duly signed by the complainant herself. All the documents of loan have been signed by the complainant at Delhi and all the loan agreement was also signed by the complainant at Delhi, therefore, according to Consumer Protection Act, 1986, this commission has no jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint.
7 In view of above discussion, this commission has no jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint and the complainant should approach the commission having appropriate jurisdiction as per law. All the applications pending in this case are hereby disposed of. Copy of order be supplied by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar as per rules. File be sent back to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar.
Announced in Open Commission
20.09.2022
