In the Court of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata, 8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087. CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 215 / 2007 1) Sri Devasis Rudra, 677, M.B. Road, Kolkata-49. ---------- Complainant ---Verses--- 1) ICICIHCF Ltd., 2/6, Sarat Bose Road, Kolkata-19. ---------- Opposite Party Present : Sri S. K. Majumdar, President. Sri T.K. Bhattachatya, Member. Order No. 1 6 Dated 2 6 / 1 1 / 2 0 0 9 . The instant case arises out of petition of complaint u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1086 lodged by Sri Debasis Rudra, the complainant against ICICIHCF Ltd., 4th floor, Central Plaza, 2/6, Sarat Bose Road, Kolkata-19 praying for refund of excess payment of Rs.59480/- only which was paid to the developer three years in advance as per payment schedule. Being approached by the complainant about the refund of this amount, the developer asked him to get the NOC (No Objection Certificate) from ICICIHFC Ltd. which the letter refused to give. Hence the case has been filed by the complainant with the aforesaid paryers. Specific case of the complainant is that the complainant applied for a house loan from ICICIHFC Ltd. and loan of Rs.19,38,000/- only was sanctioned by the o.p. the ICICIHFC (Attachment-1of petition of complaint). During subsequent check a month later, the complainant found that an excess amountofRs.59,480/- only was paid to the developer three years in advance, since the amount was scheduled to be paid only after completion/handing over of the apartment. Being approached by the complainant, the developer/builder asked for NOC from ICICIHFC Ltd. which the letter refused to give. The complainant in his prayer stated to recover Rs.59,480/- together with an interest @ 30% over and above the interest charged by them on the loan now from the day of disbursement of loan till the final settlement of the case and prayed for a compensation as deemed by forum. Decision with reasons : On perusal of the petition of complaint, documents on record and BNA, it is evident that the petition of complaint suffers from defect and infirmity since the developer/builder who is an important reason in refunding the money paid in advance as per payment schedule to the bank sanctioning the loan amount at the time of receiving the money and as a result of which the complainant is to pay interest much ahead of the scheduled time is not impleaded in the cause list as one of parties. As such, the instant case suffers from infirmity due to non-joinder of necessary party, viz. the developer/builder. Thus, keeping due regard to the circumstances above, the case is dismissed on maintainability ground due to non-joinder of necessary party. However, the complainant is at liberty to lodge a case afresh with proper cause title by way of impleading the necessary party / parties. Fees paid are corrent. The case is thus disposed of from this Forum. Supply certified copy of this order to the parties on receipt of prescribed fees. _____Sd-_______ ______Sd-____ MEMBER PRESIDENT | 
