Date of Filing:15.11.2007<br /> Date of Order: 31.01.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2272 OF 2007 <br /> <br /> S.R. Manjunath,<br /> R/at No.20, “Jyothiraditya”<br /> I Floor, Before Talakaveri Layout,<br /> Amruthahalli, Bangalore-560 092. Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> M. Ramareddy,<br /> Alias Shantha Raju,<br /> Manager Executive,<br /> Centurian Bank Punjab Ltd.,<br /> 9/2, II Cross, Sankey Road,<br /> Lower Palace Orchards, Sadashivanagar,<br /> Bangalore-560 080. Opposite Party<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President:-<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 claiming refund of Rs.11,224/- the processing fee charged by the opposite party.<br /> The facts of the case are that, the complainant applied for housing loan with the opposite party Bank. The opposite party charged and collected Rs.11,224/- towards processing fee of the loan application. The opposite party has not sanctioned the loan nor returned the processing fee to the complainant. Legal notice was issued to the opposite party calling upon to pay back the amount. Notice was not replied. Hence, the complaint. <br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite party. Notice was served. In spite of service of notice opposite party has not appeared. Heard the arguments of the counsel for the complainant. <br /> 3. The point for consideration is:-<br /> Whether the complainant is entitled for <br /> refund of processing fee? <br /> <br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 4. It is the case of the complainant that, he has applied for housing loan and he submitted documents and necessary papers. The opposite party Bank has not sanctioned the loan, but however it has charged Rs.11,224/- towards processing fee. Notice issued by the complainant has not been replied by the opposite party. The notice sent by this Forum is served and the opposite party did not appear and contested the matter. The case made out by the complainant has gone unchallenged. There is nothing to disbelieve the case made out by the complainant. The opposite party Bank is entitled to charge processing fee because, the Bank has to take the opinion of legal adviser before sanctioning the loan. The Bank has to pay legal fee to the legal adviser. Even though the loan was not sanctioned still the Bank is entitled to charge and collect some amount towards processing fee. But in this case, the opposite party Bank collected Rs.11,224/- towards processing fee. This amount appears to be a higher rate. However, it can be just fair and reasonable to allow Rs.3,000/- to be charged as processing fee and the remaining amount shall be ordered to be refunded to the complainant. I feel on the facts of the case, the ends of justice will be met in ordering the opposite party to refund Rs. 8,224/- to the complainant. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:- <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 5. The complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.8,224/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order failing which, the amount carries interest at 10% p.a after expiry of one month. <br /> 6. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> <br /> 7. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2008.<br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br />