D.o.F:16/11/16

D.o.O:30/5/2017

                      IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUMIDDUKKI

                                                                CC.NO.317/16

                                              Dated this, the 30^th    day of May 2017

PRESENT:

SRI.S.GOPAKUMAR : PRESIDENT

SRI.BENNY.K.            : MEMBER

John Ulahannan,Chalil Plakkal Veedu,

Muthalakkudam Po, Kallumali,                                        : Complainant

Thodupuzha.

(Adv.K.M.Sanu)

1. Manager, Indusind Bank,

              Vengallur ,Thodupuzha Po                                      : Opposite Parties

2. Manager, Indusind Bank,

Vellurkunnam Po ,Muvattupuzha Po

                                                                                          ORDER

SRI.BENNY.K.            : MEMBER

       The complainant had availed a loan for Rs.1,25,000/- from the 2^nd  opposite party to purchase an APE CARGO Auto with Reg.No.KL 38C9744.  He had agreed to repay the amount  in 36 monthly instalments, in which 24 instalments with Rs.5640/-each  and  11 instalments  Rs.5140/- each.  One instalment collected in advance by the opposite party.  2^nd Opposite party also collected an amount of Rs.16,900/- as insurance charge of the vehicle. Complainant approached the opposite parties for settling the loan account  but the 2^nd  opposite party is demanding a huge amount as interest and penal charges and not ready to give NOC of the vehicle.  

                In the written version of  opposite party had admitted that the complainant had entered in the loan agreement vide No.23/08/2013 on  23/8/2013 to purchase an Ape cargo .  The agreed amount was Rs.1,25,000/- and  agreed to repay the same with  interest charges of Rs.54,900/- with insurance charge , the 35 monthly instalments starting from 21/9/2013 to 21/7/2016.  He also agreed to pay the EMI on or before 21^st day of every month.  As per the terms and conditions under which the loan was sanctioned, the complainant is liable to pay additional interest charges for the payment  affected after 21^st day of every month.  Complainant had delayed in paying the monthly instalments regularly and hence additional interest charges had crept in to the account .  This opposite party also granted 1^st year insurance  freely to the complainant.  The complainant is liable to pay an amount of Rs.15,149/- towards additional interest to the opposite party

   3.    The point for consideration is whether there  is  any deficiency in service on the part of      

      opposite party and if so  for what  relief  the complainant is entitled to ?

        4.   Only  documentary evidence adduced and marked by the complainant as Exts P1 & P2.

   5.  Complainant had availed a loan of Rs.1,25,000/- to purchase an APE Auto from  2^nd opposite party.  He also  had agreed  to repay the amount in 36 monthly instalments . Rs. 5640/-each  on 24 instalments and Rs.5140/- each  in 11 instalments.  One instalment was taken in advance.  Complainant approached the opposite party for settling the loan account  but the opposite party is demanding a huge amount as interest and penal charges and not willing  to issue NOC of the vehicle. 

     In the written version,  opposite party had admitted that the complainant had entered in the loan agreement vide No.23/08/2013 on  23/8/2013 to purchase an Ape cargo .  The agreed amount was Rs.125,000/- and also agreed to repay the same with  interest charges of Rs.54900/- with insurance charge in 35 monthly instalments starting from 21/9/2013 to 21/7/2016. Complainant was  agreed to pay the EMI on or before 21^st day of every month.  As per the terms and conditions under which the loan was sanctioned, the complainant is liable to pay additional interest charges for the payment  effected after 21^st day of every month.  Complainant  is a chronic defaulter  and not paid the  instalments in time.  This opposite party also granted 1^st year insurance premium   freely to the complainant.  The complainant is liable to pay an amount of Rs.15149/- towards additional interest to the opposite party.

        The  2^nd opposite party has no contention against the loan amount and the instalment repayment. 2^nd  Opposite party states that complainant was a chronic  defaulter.  The statement of account  of the said loan was produced  and marked as Ext.P1.  Since the complainant was not ready to pay the amount, 2^nd opposite party had initiated arbitration proceedings.  Complainant alleges that opposite party is a demanding additional amount eventhough he had paid the entire loan amount.  Complainant has produced the receipt  for the same Exts.P2 .

   Opposite party states that default interest was agreed  by the complainant  for the delayed payment.  But the loan agreement or other  documents are not produced to  show that the opposite party can charge huge penal interest.  The only dispute is regarding the default charge.  Opposite party has not produced any authentic document from  RBI or  Government  to show that they can charge huge interest for the delayed instalments, which is illegal and unjustice.

   In the result  the petition is partly allowed. The 2^nd opposite party is  directed to settle the loan account of the complainant by charging only 12% interest per annum for the defaulted instalments for the defaulted period and return all documents including NOC of the vehicle within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

    Pronounced in the open forum  on this  the  30^th    day of  May 2017 

                                                                       SRI.BENNY.K             :MEMBER

                                                                      SRI.S.GOPAKUMAR : PRESIDENT

Exts:

P1-Statement of account

P2- cash receipts

eva