Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

21/2013

Alexzander C.Wheeler, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Manager, Corporation Bank, - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.M.Radhakrishanan

22 Aug 2016

ORDER

                                                                          Complaint presented on:  25.09.2012

                                                                             Order pronounced on:  09.09.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,           MEMBER II

 

FRIDAY THE 09^th    DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016

 

C.C.NO.21/2013

 

Alexzander C.Wheeler,

S/o.Albert Edward Wheeler,

Royal Orchid,

No.11/6,Foxen Street,

Perambur,

Chennai – 600 011.

 

                                                                                    ..... Complainant

 

..Vs..

Manager,

Corporation Bank,

Nungambakkam,

Chennai – 600 034.

 

	......Opposite Party

Date of complaint                                 : 28.01.2013

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.M.Radhakrishnan

Counsel for opposite party                       : M/s.N.Venkateswaran & V.Rajeswari

 

 

 

     

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant availed a  loan with the Opposite Party to a tune of Rs.7.40 lakhs and the said loan sanctioned on 12.12.03. The Complainant gave his flat at Perambur as security under equitable mortgage. The rate of  interest for the said loan is as 7.75%. The Complainant agreed to repay the said loan with interest in 120 monthly installments at the rate of Rs.8,870/- per month. The Complainant commenced repayment from 12.01.2014 and the period for the said loan amount from 12.01.04 to 12.06.12. The actual payment of the amount should be at Rs.9,04,740/-. The balance outstanding amount works out to Rs.1,73,650/-. So the balance to be  payable by him is Rs.1,73,650/-. However the Opposite Party has boosted the balance figure to the tune of Rs.3,09,804/-. Thus the Opposite Party illegally claims an additional amount of Rs.1,36,154/-. The Complainant approached the Opposite Party in this regard and the Opposite Party informed him that due to fluctuating rate of interest such amount arrived. The Opposite Party never informed the Complainant at any stage about the fluctuating rate of interest. The fluctuating rate of interest is against the terms and conditions of the sanction order. The procedure   adopted by the Opposite Party to arrive balance amount is unjust, unfair and arbitrary. In the fluctuating rate of interest is invalid under law. The Complainant sent a letter on 16.06.2012 requesting the Opposite Party to clarify regarding the fluctuating rate of interest. Due to the false figure arrived by the Opposite Party the Complainant suffered with mental agony. Hence the Complainant filed this Complaint to direct the Opposite Party to desist from collecting illegal amount of Rs.3,09,804/- from him  and also for compensation with cost of the Complaint.

2. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE   OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

          The Opposite Party admits that he had sanctioned housing loan to the tune of Rs.7.40 lakhs as a takeover liability  from Tata Home Finance Limited. The Complainant agree to pay monthly installment of Rs.8,870/- on 14^th day of every succeeding month. The sanctioned letter dated 12.12.03 proves that the  rate of interest was that  of 7.75% p.a. or such other rate as determined by the bank from time to time and the said loan is subject to the terms and conditions of the housing loan. The Complainant executed necessary loan document. The rate of interest was not a fixed one. The clause in housing loan agreement stipulated that the rate of interest will be floating rate of interest as and when the RBI revises the rate of interest for housing loan. The said agreement itself provides to levy 2% penal interest p.a on the belated payment  of monthly installment. The Opposite Party had paid insurance premium amount and the same was debited for a sum of Rs.30,088/- and the same was debited from housing loan account of the Complainant. The statement of account for the housing loan of the Complainant produced by the Opposite Parties will prove that every month interest amount is varies. Further the Complainant had not paid monthly installment in the months of September 2008, January 2009, February 2009 as there were no sufficient amount available in his account. The Opposite Party has not charged any amount other than the agreed revised rate of interest at principal every month as EMI’s. Therefore this Opposite Party has not committed any Deficiency in Service and prays to dismiss the Complaint. 

3. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what relief?

4. POINT NO :1

          It is an admitted fact that the Complainant availed a housing loan to the tune of Rs.7.40 lakhs and the said loan was sanctioned under Ex.A1 sanctioned letter as a takeover liability from Tata Finance Limited repayable with 120 equated  monthly installment of Rs.8,870/- commencing from 14.01.2004. Ex.A2 is the State Bank Account of the Complainant maintained by the Opposite Party and the said statement proves the repayment of monthly installment to the Opposite Party.

          5. The case of the Complainant is that he had regularly paid the EMI’S every month  a sum of Rs.8,870/- per month and accordingly he had paid a sum of Rs.8,870/- by way of EMI’s and he is due to pay only a sum of Rs.1,73,60/- towards the loan and whereas the Opposite Party sent false statement that the Complainant is due to pay a sum of Rs.3,09,804/- and thereby the Opposite Party illegally  claims a sum of Rs.1,36,154/- and when he approached the Opposite Party, he was informed that due to fluctuating rate of interest such amount was arrived by the Opposite Party and the Opposite Party never informed him at any stage about the fluctuating rate of interest against the terms and condition of the sanction order and therefore by not informing the fluctuating rate of interest to the Complainant and also illegally arrived a balance amount Rs.3,09,804/- is not sustainable and thereby the Opposite Party committed Deficiency in Service.

          6. The Opposite Party replied that as per sanction order and the agreement clause’s the fluctuating rate of interest applied and having the Complainant is the party to the agreement he is well aware of the same and further the Opposite Party  applied interest rate as per the RBI directives then and there and further the Complainant is not regular in payment of EMI’s and therefore prays to dismiss the Complaint.

          7. Considering the rival contentions of the parties it has to be decided, whether the bank committed Deficiency in Service about not informing the fluctuating rate of interest to the Complainant.

          8. Ex.A1 is the sanction order contains a column rate of interest. In the said column it is specifically mentioned “7.75% p.a or such  other rate as determined by the bank from time to time”. Ex.B1 is the agreement for term loan entered between the Opposite Party and the Complainant. In the said loan agreement clause 3 provides as follows:

        7.75% p.a being 4.50% over and above the Bank’s LENDING RATE (PLR) which is 12.25% p.a as at present, rising or falling with the Bank’s Prime lending rate.

Clause 4 provides as follows:

        The Borrower agrees that if the equated monthly installment(s) inclusive or interest is/are not paid on the date, the arrears of installments of the loan shall bear overdue interest at the rate of 2% p.a or such other rate fixed by the Bank from time to time until in installment(s) in arrears is/are paid.

Clause 15 provides as follows:

        The Bank shall be entitled to charge or alter the rate of interest chargeable to the Borrower on the balance outstanding in the term loan either due to variation in IDBI/NABARD/SIDBI refinance rates of Bank’s lending rate/s in conformity with the directives of Reserve Bank of India or otherwise.

The above clause’s in the loan agreement and the sanction order clearly provides that at the time of sanction of loan, interest rate fixed as 7.75% and the bank shall be entitled to charge or alter the rate of interest to the borrower on the balance outstanding in the term loan in conformity with the directions of the RBI or otherwise subsequently. Further as per the loan agreement schedule to bank has right to revise the interest from time to time. Therefore the Opposite Party has rightly followed the fluctuating rate of interest in the Complainant account by   virtue of Ex.A1 sanction order and Ex.B1 loan agreement.

9. Ex.B4 statement of account of the Complainant reveals that the charged interest valid from month to month establishes the fluctuating rate of interest only followed by the Opposite Party bank. Though the Complainant pleaded in the Complaint, the words fluctuating rate of interest as against the terms and conditions of the sanction order is not sustainable in view of the contents of Ex.A1 & Ex.B1 loan agreement. The Opposite Party only followed the fluctuating rate of interest as per the signed document of the Complainant above referred. As the Opposite Party followed the fluctuating rate of interest as per directive of the RBI and for such varying rate of interest the Complainant also agreed Ex.A1 and Ex.B1, the Opposite Party specifically not informed the Complainant about the  increase in rate of interest to the Complainant cannot be faulted and further it cannot be termed as deficiency, on the part of Opposite Party. Therefore, we hold that the Opposite Party has not committed any Deficiency in Service.

 

 

 

10. POINT NO: 2

          Since the opposite party has not committed any Deficiency in Service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief in this Complaint and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed without cost.

          In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.     

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 09^th day of September 2016.

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 12.12.2003         Sanction Order of the Opposite Party

 

Ex.A2 dated 01.04.2003                   Extract taken from the S.B.of the Complainant

              To 13.03.2008

 

Ex.A3 dated 24.07.2012                   Legal Notice issued by the counsel on behalf of the

                                                    Complainant to the Opposite Party

 

Ex.A4 dated 25.07.2012                   RPAD receipt

 

Ex.A5 dated 08.08.2012                   The letter from the Manager Corporation Bank,

                                                    Nungambakkam Chennai – 34.

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE   OPPOSITE PARTY :

Ex.B1 dated 13.12.2003                   Loan documents for Housing loan Executed by the

                                                  Complainant

 

Ex.B2 dated 07.12.2006                     Acknowledgment of Debt for Housing loan

                                                     executed by the Complainant

 

Ex.B3 dated 05.12.2009                     Acknowledgment of Debt for Housing loan

                                                     executed by the Complainant 

 

Ex.B4 dated April 2004                      Statement of Account for the Housing loan of the

To February 2013                         Complainant

 

Ex.B5 dated From

01.04.2003 to 31.03.2004            Statement Account

Ex.B6 dated 02.03.2004                   Application form for Insurance coverage

                                                    Viz.corp Jeevan Griha Raksha

 

Ex.B7 dated 10.01.2014                   Demand Notice U/S 13(2) of Sarfaesi Act

                                                    to the Complainant

 

Ex.B8 dated 06.02.2014                   Served Postal Acknowledgement Cards

 

Ex.B9 dated 12.04.2013                    Statement of Accounts C Home/01/030019

To 30.09.2015                             together with separate entry of Uncharged

                                                    interests as per RBI Norms in respect

                                                    of NPA accounts

 

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT