Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/442/2020

Santosh Kumar Saini - Complainant(s)

Versus

LIC Housing Finance Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Devinder Kumar

25 Oct 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/442/2020
Date of Institution	:	12/10/2020
Date of Decision	:	25/10/2023

 

Santosh Kumar Saini S/o Late Sh.Ramji Lal, aged about 58 years, R/o House No.1066, B-1, Ratpur Colony, Pinjore, Haryana.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

1. LIC Housing Finance Ltd., SCO No.2445-2446, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh through its Deputy Manager.
2. LIC Housing Finance Ltd., Registered Office: Bombay Life Bldg. 2^nd Floor, 45/47, Veer Nariman Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001 through its Managing Director.

… Opposite Parties

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                

ARGUED BY	:	Sh.Devinder Kumar, Counsel for Complainant.
	:	Sh.Piyush Sharma, Counsel for OPs.

 

Per Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member

1.      Averments are that the complainant approached to the OP No.1 for the purpose of housing loan and disclosed his requirement to the OP No.1. After going through the documents, OP sanctioned home loan of Rs.5,00,000/- in scheme of Griha Prakash in favour of the complainant (Annexure C-1). From month of June, 2009 OP continuously presented the EMI through ECS mode in the bank account of complainant. From June, 2009 to till date there is no default on the part of the complainant. In the present matter OP after completion of loan tenure from June, 2009 to May 2019, with mala fide intention and to grab the money from the complainant presented the EMI through ECS process and received more than the loan amount from the complainant even after the completion of the stipulated period of loan. It is also stated that as per the RBI guidelines OP was bound to intimate about the increasing and decreasing of loan amount. But in the present case no intimation was given to the complainant about the increasing and decreasing of loan installment. It is also stated that the complainant approached to the OP No.1 and demanded the complete statement of account from the year 2009 to till date and to refund the excess amount received from the complainant. Instead of supply the complete statement of account and refund of the amount, OP only supplied payment details for the period of 12 months installments (Annexure C-2). The OP failed to supply the information as demanded by the complainant, thus the complainant submitted an application dated 16.07.2020 (Annexure C-3), no response is received from the OP. Despite receipt of the letter and verbal requests of the complainant nothing has been done by the OP to resolve the issue or to refund the excess amount. Hence, is the present consumer complaint.
2.     OPs contested the consumer complaint, filed their written reply and stated that the loan of Rs.5 lakh had been sanctioned to the complainant by the OPs for a period of 10 years at floating interest rate @ 8.75% and the same had been accepted by the complainant (Annexure OP-1). It is further stated that the term of the loan has been increased in accordance with the loan agreement though the EMI remained the same and now the loan is being liquidated on 07.05.2021. Nothing has been done arbitrarily but in view of loan agreement. A detail of interest applied time to time on loan account in question is annexed as Annexure OP-3 and loan account statement is annexed as OP-4. It is abundantly clear that nothing in excess has been charged from the complainant and the averments raised by the complainant are completely baseless. On these lines, the case is sought to be defended.
3.     Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated.
4.     Parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
5.     We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case.
6.     On perusal of complaint, it is gathered that the main grievance of the complainant is that the number of EMIs on account of loan taken from the OPs have been increased arbitrarily and no intimation has been given by the OPs about change of interest rates to be charged from time to time and the excess amount recovered have not been refunded.
7.     On perusal of records annexed by OPs as Annexure OP-1 & OP-2, it is observed that the OP has opted for the floating rate of interest. We reproduce here clause 2.2 (a) & clause 2.9 as below:-

2.2 Interest

         (a) In the event the BORROWER/S opts for the Floating Rate of Interest offered by LICHFL, the special offer rate of interest stipulated in the schedule shall be reviewed after the three (3) months from the date of first disbursement and thereafter the interest shall be based on the LIC Housing Prime Lending Rate (LHPLR) plus/minus the spread as prevailing at the time of sanction (subject to quarterly review) as fixed by LICHFL from time to time. The Revised Floating Rate of Interest will be applicable with effect from 1^st January, 1^st April, 1^st July or 1^st October, as the case may be.

    2.9 Alteration and Re-Scheduling of Equated monthly installment EMI: If the entire amount of LOAN is not drawn by the BORROWER/S within a period of 12 months from the effective date, Equated monthly installments (EMI) may be altered and re-scheduled in such manner and to such extent as LICHFL may, in its sole discretion, decide and the repayment will thereupon be made as per the said alteration and re-scheduling notwithstanding anything stated in this agreement.

 

         In view of the above, we are of the view that the OPs have rightfully changed the amount of EMI or the number of EMI.

8.       As far as the second grievance is concerned, we are of the view that the OPs were duty bound to intimate to the complainant about the rate of interest to be charged/varied every quarter, which has not been done by the OPs, hence, the OPs are deficient in providing service to the complainant, which has caused mental harassment to the complainant.

9.       In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly partly allowed. OPs are directed as under :-

1. to pay an amount of ₹10,000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him.
2. to pay ₹10,000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

8.     This order be complied with by the OPs within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amount mentioned at Sr.No.(i) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(ii) above.
9.     Pending miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed of.
10.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

			Sd/-
25/10/2023			[Pawanjit Singh]
Ls			President
			Sd/-
			[Surjeet Kaur]
			Member
			Sd/-
			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
			Member