BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.
Complaint no.282/12.
Date of instt.: 06.11.2012.
Date of Decision: 22.12.2014.
Dr. R.P.Maan, C/o Maan Skin Hospital & Laser Centre, Dhand Road, Kaithal.
……….Complainant.
Versus
1. ICICI Bank, Kaithal Branch Kurukshetra Road, Kaithal through its Branch Manager.
2. ICICI Bank, Regional Office, Opp. Mini Secretariat, Sector-12, Karnal through its Deputy General Manager.
3. ICICI Bank, Head Office, Landmark, Race Course Circle, Badodra through its Managing Director.
4. Vikas Jindal, Jat School Market, Opp. Jat School Ground, Kaithal.
..……..Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
Before: Sh. Rajbir Singh, Presiding Member.
Smt. Harisha Mehta, Member.
Present : Sh. Anil Chutani, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. A.K.Khurania, Advocate for the opposite parties.No.1 to 3.
Sh. Deepak Seth, Adv. for Op No.4.
ORDER
(HARISHA MEHTA, MEMBER).
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that he approached the Ops for loan subject to payment of interest on the loan amount and also paid process and other expenses as consideration for the services rendered by the Ops. It is alleged that in order to provide better advance treatment to the patient by laser surgery, the complainant sought to install/bring new machines at his hospital. It is further alleged that after due search, the machine in the field made by the Lumenis Company, USA seemed more compactable and useful, but as the cost of said machine are high, so, the complainant approached the Ops on October, 2011 for the loan vide application No.77790434929 allotted by the Ops to which the Op No.1 happily gave the assent and assured to fulfill all the requisite legal as-well-as other official formalities within a period of one month. It is further alleged that only upon the assurance of the Op No.1, the complainant contacted with the aforesaid Lumenis Company, 5302 Betsy Rose Drive, Santa Clara, CA 95054 USA, who gratuitously accepted the offer of the complainant and assured to make delivery within a period of one month from the date of order subject to the condition that the whole sale price would be paid in U.S. currency and that too prior to delivery. It is further alleged that during this period, the Op No.4 who was previously introduced by the Op No.1 to the complainant, who met with the complainant a number of time in context with fulfillment of legal and other official formalities and not only took Rs.23,164/- through cheque in the favour of bank in the shape of process fee for granting of the loan but also took advance of Rs.7500/- in cash on account of fulfillment of other formalities by assuring that the same would be adjusted later or in the loan account. It is further alleged that the complainant duly followed all the advises of Op No.4 as-well-as visited the premises of the Ops in hope of sanctioning of desired loan at the stipulated time but every time, both the Ops No.1 & 4 lingered on the matter on one pretext or the other. This way, the Ops are deficient in service. Hence, this complaint is filed.
2. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared before this forum and filed written statement separately. Ops No.1 to 3 filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus-standi; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering Ops; that the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum; that the complainant approached the respondent ICICI Bank through authorized DMA Mr. Vikas Jindal-Naina Associates, Kaithal for the balance takeover of his existing loan from LIC Housing Finance and Top Up amount in the month of November, 2011. Further on his application dt. 08.11.2011, he was sanctioned a loan amount of Rs.23,50,000/- vide application No.7790434929 and 7790455227 on 17.11.2011 duly accepted by him on the same day. That non refundable administrative charges of Rs.23,164/- were levied as per sanction letter dt. 17.11.2011 which was duly accepted by the complainant. The answering Op bank acknowledges the receipt of cheque No.003494 amounting to Rs.23,164/- towards non-refundable administrative charges towards loan on 24.11.2011. The answering Op bank had sanctioned that loan well-in-time but the complainant had not availed the loan due to the reason best known to him. On merits, the contents of complaint are denied and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.
3. Op No.4 filed the written statement on the same line as of Ops No.1 to 3 and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.
4. In support of their case, both the parties submitted their affidavits and documents.
5. We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and minutely.
6. In the instant case, the Ops gave assurance to the complainant that they will sanction the requisite amount in shape of loan for the purchase of machine within stipulated period. The complainant met the Ops several times for the fulfillment of several formalities. The Ops took Rs.23,164/- through cheque in favour of bank in the shape of process fee for granting of the loan and also took advance of Rs.7500/- in cash on account of fulfillment of other formalities by assuring that the same would be adjusted lateron in the loan account. But the Ops gave replied that the complainant was sanctioned loan amount of Rs.23,50,000/- on 17.11.2011 and took Rs.23,164/- towards non-refundable administrative charges towards the loan. But the Ops only sanctioned loan and the same was not disbursed. The Ops did not open any loan account regarding the disbursement of loan of complainant. The Ops were not willing to settle the administrative charges in any way with the complainant. So, we are of the considered view that the Ops are deficient on their part while rendering services to the complainant.
7. Thus, in view of above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the Ops to pay all the amount i.e. Rs.23,164/- + Rs.7500/- which the Ops had taken from the complainant on account of process fee and other expenses as loan money has not been paid to the complainant. All the Ops are jointly and severally liable. Let the order be complied within 30 days, failing which, the complainant shall be entitled interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of commencement of order till its realization. A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced.
Dt.22.12.2014.
(Harisha Mehta), (Rajbir Singh),
Member. Presiding Member.
