THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOZHIKODE.
C.C.243/2010
Dated this the 12th day of August 2013.
( Present: Sri. G. Yadunadhan, B.A., LLB. : President)
Sri. L. Jyothikumar, B.A., LLB. : Member
ORDER
By L.Jyothikumar, Member:
The petition was filed on 02.07.2010. The case of the complainant is that he had availed a housing loan of Rs.5,00,000/- from the opposite party on May 2008. But the complainant repaid the entire amount on April 2010. On repayment the opposite party levied a sum of Rs.9,787/- as a pre-closure charges. It is contented that the above charge for pre-closing loan is illegal and has sought for refund of the same. Hence the complaint.
Notice was served to the opposite party. Opposite party has filed version stating the collection of Rs.9,787/- as pre-closure charges is admitted. It is contended that pre-closure charges was levied as per the terms and conditions of the loan agreement. There is no deficiency in service and complaint is liable to be dismissed.
The only point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled for any relief.
Complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A7 were marked on complainant’s side. Opposite party has not adduced any oral evidence. Ext.B1 document marked on opposite party’s side.
Complainant alleges that the pre-closure charges of Rs.9,787/- collected from him is illegal and prays for refund of the same with cost and compensation. Opposite party admits the collection of Rs.9,787/-. It is submitted that as per the terms and conditions of the loan agreement, it was stipulated that if the borrower opts to pre-close, pre-closure charges will be levied on the balance outstanding. Opposite party has produced the Home loan agreement. In Appeal No.79/2008(decided on 05.05.2010) General Manager, SBT and others V/s.Rajan.K.C, Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held that levy of pre-closure charges amounts to deficiency in service and hence illegal. In State Bank of India V/s.Dr.Usha Vaid and other(Revision Petition No.2466/07 decided on 26.07.2007) Hon’ble National Commission has also taken the view that the banks and Financial Institutions should not collect any pre-closure charges if the loan is discharged by the borrower before the agreed period. The consumer’s right to avail loan facility at a lesser rate interest should not be curtailed by certain clauses of the alleged agreement between the parties. Applying the principles laid in the above decisions by higher commissions we held that the collection of pre-closure charges amounts to deficiency in service.
In the result complaint is allowed and opposite party is ordered to pay a sum of Rs.9,787/- to the complainant along with interest @ 10% from the date of filing the complaint till realization and also the cost of Rs.1000/-within three weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order .
Pronounced in the open court this the 12th day of August 2013.
Date of filing:02.07.2010.
SD/-PRESIDENT SD/-MEMBER.
APPENDIX
Documents exhibited for the complainant:
A1. Statement of loan account issued by the opposite party to the complainant
dtd.06.10.2010
A2.Statement of loan account from 01.04.2009 to 31.03.2010 dtd.06.10.10
A3. Copy of statement of loan account of April 2010
A4. Letter issued by opposite party to the complainant dtd.30.04.2010.
A5. Copy of cheque issued by the complainant to the opposite party for Rs.4,60,099/-
dtd.30.04.2010.
A6. Letter issued by the opposite party to the complainant dtd.13.05.2010.
A7. Statement of account submitted by opposite party from 30.04.10 to 13.05.2010.
Documents exhibited for the opposite party:
B1. Home loan agreement book of HDFC Bank.
Witness examined for the complainant:
PW1. Ashraf.P.M.(Complainant)
Witness examined for the opposite party:
None
Sd/-President
//True copy//
(Forwarded/By Order)
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
