D.O.F:11/09/2020

                                                                                                       D.O.O:10/03/2023

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES  REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KASARAGOD

CC.113/2020

Dated this, the 10^th day of March 2023

PRESENT:

SRI.KRISHNAN.K                          : PRESIDENT

SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M   : MEMBER

SMT.BEENA.K.G                              : MEMBER

1. K.Karunakaran Nair,

Son of DhermanNair,

Thekkekara House,

Munnad Post,

Kasaragod District- 671 541

2. Vanaja .C.K,

W/o Karunakaran Nair,

D/o Kunhambu Nair,

Thekkekara House,

Munnad Post,

Kasaragod District- 671 541: Complainants

3. Vipin Kumar,

S/o Karunakaran Nair,

Thekkekara House,

Munnad Post,

Kasaragod District- 671 541

4. Varun K,

S/o Karunakaran Nair,

Thekkekara House,

Munnad Post,

Kasaragod District- 671 541

(Adv. K. Karunakaran Nambiar)

1. Manager,

ICICI Bank,

Kasaragod Branch,

Bank Road,

Kasaragod- 671121

: Opposite Parties

2. ICICI Bank,

Regd. Office,

Racxe Course Circle,

                 Vadodara

Gujarath- 390 007

(Adv. Lal. K. Joseph)

ORDER

SRI.KRISHNAN.K     :PRESIDENT

            The case of the Complainant is that he, joining with his wife and children availed a loan of Rs.10,00,000/- from Opposite Party bank on 16/02/2016.  Repayment of loan is 180 monthly installments.  The complainant requested option of premature repayment.  Agreed by Opposite Party fixing Rs.8,70,800/- payable on or before 05/04/2020.  He made the repayment via RTGS, credited to Opposite Party account, acknowledged by them.  But in violation of terms, opposite Party debited Rs.24,000/- from account of Complainant on 05/04/2020 and 05/05/2020.  Again Opposite Party demanded Rs.13,500/- compelled to deposit, returned title deeds on 23/07/2020, the amount collected by Opposite Party is in excess, there is deficiency in service, negligence, caused mental tension, financial loss and therefore complainant seeks to refund Rs.13,550/- with interest.  Compensation of Rs.25,000/- besides litigation costs.

2.         The Opposite Party filed written version.  Complaint is bad for non-joinder of all the borrowers of the loan.  Availing of loan admitted, date of agreement is on 27/01/2016.  Repayment by way of 180 monthly installments is admitted premature repayment request for Rs.8,70,800/- is accepted, if paid on or before 05/04/2020.  Auto debit is generated since no written request is given for premature payment.  Remittance of Rs.13,550/- on 18/05/2020 is admitted.  No EMI is generated after 05/05/2020.  Hence, complaint is to be dismissed.

3.         Other borrowers also impleaded on 12/08/2021.  The complainant filed chief affidavit.  Marked documents Ext.A1 to A4.  Ext.A1 is loan sanction letter 02/02/2020.  Ext.A2 is prepayment loan letter dated 20/03/2020.  Ext.A3 is loan account statement dated 03/06/2020.  Ext.A4 is letter of return of documents 23/07/2020.

4.         The Opposite Party filed chief affidavit marked documents Ext.B1 to B3.  Ext.B1 is loan facility agreement.  Ext.B2 is prepayment statement dated 18/05/2020, Ext.B3 is print out of prepayment schedule.

5.         As per rival contentions following points arise for consideration.  

a)  Whether complainant is entitled to refund of Rs.13,550/- collected by Opposite Party on 18/05/2020 as claimed in the complaint.

b)   Whether there is any deficiency in service of Opposite Party and if so, whether complainant is entitled to any compensation and if so for what reliefs? Both points discussed together:-

6.         Ext.A1 loan sanction letter shows Rs.10,00,000/- is sanctioned to complainant as per terms.  Ext.A2 shows total amount payable for repayment if paid on or before 05/04/2020 is Rs.8,70,800/-.  If not paid installments for the following month is payable.  As a precaution, stop payment request is advised.  Ext.A3 is loan account statement.  Ext.A4 shows that documents were returned on closing of loan account.

7.         It is very pertinent to note that Opposite Party Bank has no definite case why complainant is directed to remit Rs.13,550/- on 18/05/2020.  Under what head account paid is appropriated by the bank.  Only suggestion while PW1 in box is that bank collected only the amount payable by complainant to the bank which suggestion is denied by complainant.  Written request for foreclosure is not mandatory but only as a precaution as revealed as per A2.  Further as per A2 letter amount of Rs.8,70,800/- is payable on or before 05/04/2020, DW1 while in box in cross examination and written version admitted that amount payable if paid on or before 05/04/2020 is Rs.8,70,800/- and that complainant paid the amount even on 02/04/2020 DW1 further admits in page 2 deposition, that amount shown in A2 if paid on 05/04/2020 bank agreed to return documents.  He also admits even after payment, loan documents not returned.  Answer is yes.  He also admits that 48^th installment due paid and no other payment due.  He deposed that Rs.24,000/- is debited from account of complainant and that it was told by Opposite Party on 18/05/2020 that only on payment of Rs.13,550/- documents will be returned and this amount is collected.  Loan documents are returned only on 23/07/2020 citing lockdown covid 2019.  DW1 fairly admitted that bank did not give any statement to complainant on what item or on what basis excess amount collected is adjusted.

8.         From the available materials and evidence adduced both documentary as well as oral, and admission as above.  It is revealed that complainant is liable to pay 8,70,800/- towards loan closure if paid on or before 05/04/2020 whereas complainant remitted the same on 02/04/2020.  So, the complainant is not liable to pay any amount to the bank either towards principal or interest due.  Any amount collected either by auto debit on 05/04/2020 and 05/05/2020 and cash received on 18/05/2020 is in excess of the amount payable by complainant.  No person either bank or individual is permitted to enrich itself at the cost of another.  A person who has obtained a benefit at the expense of another should be liable to restitute to other from whom he has gained.

            Thus we are of the view that auto debit of Rs.24,000/- on 05/04/2020 and 05/05/2020 from account of complainant and an amount of Rs.13,550/- paid on 18/05/2020 by complainant to the loan account after paying Rs.8,70,880/- is in excess of the amount due by the complainant towards loan account and thus opposite Party is liable to refund the same to the complainant.  Relief column No.1 shows that opposite Party may be directed to refund Rs.13,550/- collected excess and other additional charges collected with interest is claimed in the complaint. Unauthorized collection of Rs.24,000/- by auto debit and Rs.13550/- on 18/05/2020 is not an amount legally amount due to bank, hence collection and denial for refund of excess amount is a serious deficiency in service of Opposite Party bank and thus bank is liable to refund the amount to the complainant.  There is no reason to deny the interest thereon from date of payment till repayment.

            Here is a bank instead of readily agreeing to refund the excess amount collected though agree accepting amount, not disclosing adjustment of amount collected to any item or sufficient details except denying its liability to refund and taken the consumers to prolonged litigation and considering the nature and circumstances in dealing mental tension and financial loss thereby complainant is entitled to compensation thereof.  The complainant claimed Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) which is found reasonable considering the total amount collected by bank in excess of their claim legally due therein.  The complainant is also entitled to litigation cost fixed at Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only).

            In the result complaint is allowed in part the Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs.24,000/- (Rupees Twenty Four Thousand only) collected by auto debit on 05/04/2020 and also to pay Rs.13,550/- (Rupees Thirteen Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty only) collected on 18/05/2020 with interest at 8% from the date of filing the complaint dated 18/09/2020 till date of payment and also to pay Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) as compensation for deficiency in service of Opposite Party bank as above along with cost of litigation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) within 30 days of the date of this order.

     Sd/-                                                        Sd/-                                                        Sd/-

MEMBER                                             MEMBER                                         PRESIDENT

Exhibits

A1:  Loan sanction letter

A2:  Prepayment of loan letter

A3:  Loan account statement

A4:  Letter of return of documents

B1:  Loan facility agreement

B2:Prepayment statement

B3:  Print out of prepayment schedule

Witness Cross examine

PW1:  K. Karunakaran Nair

DW1:  Blersin Sebastian

     Sd/-                                                       Sd/-                                                         Sd/-

MEMBER                                             MEMBER                                         PRESIDENT

Forwarded by Order

Ps/                                                                      Assistant Registrar