Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

A/15/915

SANDEEP AGRAWAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

INDIA INFOLINE FIN. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

27 Jan 2016

ORDER

M. P. STATE  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  COMMISSION,                         

PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

                                         

                                FIRST APPEAL NO. 915 OF 2015

(Arising out of order dated 20.07.2015 passed in C.C.No.481/2014 by District Forum, Gwalior)

 

1. SANDEEP AGRAWAL,

    S/O LATE BALKRISHNA AGRAWAL,

 

2. SMT. SHEWTA AGRAWAL,

    W/O SHRI SANDEEP AGRAWAL,

 

3. SMT. HEMLATA AGRAWAL,

    W/O LATE BALKRISHNA AGRAWAL

 

   ALL R/O NAI SADAK,

   LASHKAR, GWALIOR ( M.P.)                                               …   APPELLANTS.

 

Versus

 

1. INDIA INFOLINE FINANCE LIMITED,

    THROUGH MANAGER, INDIA INFOLINE

    FINANCE LIMITED, D-4, BASANT VIHAR,

    GWALIOR (M.P.).

2. INDIA INFOLINE FINANCE LIMITED,

    THROUGH COMPANY SECRETARY,

    INDIA INFOLINE FINANCE LIMITED,

    12A-10, 13^TH FLOOR, PARINEE CRESCENZO,

    C-38 AND C-39, G BLOCK, BEHIND MCA,

    BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA EAST,

    MUMBAI-400 051                                           .                  …   RESPONDENTS.

 

BEFORE :

 

            HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH SAKSENA          :       PRESIDENT

            HON’BLE SMT.NEERJA SINGH                                  :       MEMBER

            HON’BLE SHRI S. D. AGARWAL                                :       MEMBER

         

COUNSEL FOR PARTIES:

            Shri Hemant Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant.

           

                                                       O R D E R

                                              (Passed On 27.01. 2016)

                        The following order of the Commission was delivered by Shri S. D. Agarwal, Member:                 

                       

This appeal is by the complainants/appellants (hereinafter referred to as ‘appellants’) being aggrieved by the order dated 20.07.2015 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Gwalior (hereinafter referred to as ‘Forum’), in CC No. 481/2014.

2.                     The facts of the case, in brief, are that the complainants/appellants had taken financial loan in the sum of Rs.1,44,00,000/- from opposite party/respondent

-2-

(hereinafter referred to as ‘respondent’) for which an agreement no.4939 was executed on 19.11.2011.  As per agreement the appellant had to repay the loan amount in monthly instalment of Rs.2,32,322/- each through ECS.  Till 03.01.2014 the respondent realized the amount and on 03.01.2014 amount of Rs.1,29,74,191.56 was due on the appellant towards loan.  It is alleged by the appellant that since the property under subject on which the loan had been taken, was in dispute hence it was not bought. The appellants then sent several emails to respondents from 06.02.2014 to 25.02.2014 to know about outstanding dues but no response was received from them.  The appellants therefore gave a bankers cheque no. 010840 dated 28.02.2014 for Rs.1,25,00,000/- to respondents on 01.03.2014 and obtained a receipt.   Thereafter the respondents sent an email dated 19.03.2014 to appellants to deposit the dues shown as foreclosure amount of Rs.8,76,359/- after adjustment of paid amount of Rs.1.25 crore along with interest @ Rs.5,530/- per day on the remaining amount.  According to appellants, as per agreement dated 19.11.2011 they were not supposed to pay any foreclosure amount.   They, therefore, filed a complaint before the District Forum claiming an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- with interest @ 15% p.a. from the date of deposit, for quashing the demand of Rs.3,54,278.44 as per statement of account, returning the documents deposited as security, grant of NOC and compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- along with cost of Rs.7,000/-.  

3.                     The respondents instead of filing reply to complaint filed an application dated 15.06.2015 stating that the matter has been settled between the parties and as per compromise the respondents paid Rs.53,566.40 to appellants through bank draft and the documents deposited towards security were also returned to appellants. The appellants have also issued a letter of satisfaction dated 05.02.2015 in that regard.  

4.                     The District Forum dismissed the complaint holding that the appellants are not consumers as defined under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and since the appellants have already given a letter of satisfaction to respondents after receiving Rs.53, 556.40 under compromise deed and also received back the documents deposited as security, thus the dispute remains no longer between the parties.

5.                     We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.

6.                     After hearing learned counsel for the appellants and on perusal of record, we find that the appellants had obtained a huge loan amount of Rs.1,44,00,000/- to purchase HE Plot Commercial Property which is evident from sanction letter dated

-3-

19.11.2011 of respondent India Infoline Finance Limited (IIFL) marked as (Annexure C-1). Thus it is clear that the appellants had obtained loan for commercial activity, in such a situation the District Forum has rightly held that the appellants are not covered under the category of consumer as defined under Section 2(1) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 

7.                     Even otherwise during pendency of complaint before the District Forum, the appellants entered into an amicable settlement with the respondent company and in terms of settlement the respondents paid an amount of Rs.53,566.40 to appellants vide Payinst Draft No. 299781 dated 03.02.2015 drawn at HDFC Bank in favour of appellants’ company Scientific Supplies and Manufacturing Co which is enclosed as Annexure-A in the record of the District Forum.   After receiving the said amount and certain documents deposited with the respondents towards security, the appellants issued a satisfaction letter dated 05.02.2015 addressed to respondent IIFL wherein the appellants  clearly stated that they have received all the property documents in original deposited at the time of availing loan facility and assured that all issues are being resolved to their satisfaction and they will withdraw all the legal actions initiated by them including civil/criminal/consumer cases against the respondent company and more particularly the Consumer Case No. 481/14 filed before the District Forum, Gwalior.  In these circumstances we find that the District Forum has rightly dismissed the complaint on this ground too.

8.                     In view of the above we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the District Forum.  This appeal has no merit and is therefore, dismissed at the admission stage.