Kerala

Idukki

CC/29/2018

Sindhu P K - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director Mahindra and Mahindra Finance Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Adv.Lissy M M

31 Oct 2019

ORDER

DATE OF FILING :14/02/18

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 31^st day of October 2019

Present :

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR PRESIDENT

SMT.ASAMOL P. MEMBER

CC NO. 29/2018

Between

Complainant : Sindhu P.K., W/o Binoy,

Koottarapillil House,

Painavu P.O., Vazhathope, Idukki.

(By Adv: Lissy M.M.)

And

Opposite Party : 1 . Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Ltd.,

2^nd Floor, Sadhana House,

Behind Mahindra Towers, 570, P.Marg,

Worli Mumbai – 400 018.

Represented by its Managing Director.

2 . Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Ltd.,

1^st Floor, Sehion Plaza, Near BSNL Office

Erattayar Road, Kattappana- 685 508

Represented by its Branch Manager.

3 . Trans Union CIBIL Ltd.,

One India bulls Centre Tower – 24, 19^th Floor,

Senapathi, Baput Main Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 13.

Represented by its Chairman & Managing Director.

(Whole By Adv: K.S.Arundas and Adv.K.M.Sanu)

 

O R D E R

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR (PRESIDENT)

 

The case of the complainant is that,

 

Complainant availed a vehicle loan of Rs.1,70,000/- from the first opposite party on 06/12/12 agreed to repay it with 48 monthly instalments @ Rs.5,450/- per month. By December 2017, the complainant has closed the loan and the second opposite party endorsed the same in the statement of account issued to her. While the complainant approached the South Indian Bank for another loan

(Cont....2)

-2-

after closing the vehicle finance, the South Indian Bank authorities rejected her loan application on the ground that, the above said loan shows as default in CIBIL site. For closing the previous loan complainant arranged cash from other sources such as Co-Operative Societies and KSFE. Hence she is need of money to close the present financial transactions.

 

The complainant so many times approached opposite parties 1 and 2 to take steps to remove the CIBIL entry, but the opposite parties did not take any steps to redress the grievance of the complainant. Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice against the opposite parties in their act, complainant filed this petition seeking relief such as to direct the opposite parties to remove the CIBIL default status upon the loan No.2349400, further direct the opposite parties 1 and 2 to pay Rs. One Lakh as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as cost.

 

Upon notice opposite parties entered appearance and filed detailed reply version by admitting the loan transaction opposite parties further contented that the last loan instalment had to be paid on 05/11/16. But in spite of loan agreement the complainant had not repaid the instalments in time. The complainant is entitled to pay additional finance charge and cheque return charges to the opposite parties for the defaulted amount as per the agreement.

 

Opposite parties further contented that the complainant had not closed the loan till date. Two instalments and Rs.11212/- is outstanding in the loan account as penal and cheque return charges. CIBIL score rating is not in the control of this opposite parties. If any of the financial institution check for the CIBIL score then the software automatically generated the score and shows all the financial liabilities with financial institutions. Hence the opposite parties are not liable to compensate the complainant.

 

Evidence adduced by the complainant and opposite parties by way of documents alone. No oral evidence adduced by both the parties.

 

The documents such as copy of RC book, loan account statement and letter from South Indians Bank, Nagarampara Branch produced by the complainant are marked as Ext.P1 to Ext.P3 respectively.

(Cont....3)

-3-

The loan statement of account produced by the opposite parties marked as Ext.R1.

 

Heard both sides,

 

The point that arose for consideration is whether there is any deficiency in service from the part of opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?

 

The Point:- We have heard the counsels for both parties and had gone through the records.

 

It is an admitted fact that the complainant availed a vehicle loan from the first opposite party on 06/12/12 and agreed to repay it with 48 monthly instalments @ Rs.5,450/-. On the perusal of Ext.P2 loan account statement it is seen that complainant is closed the loan prior to the actual period of closing and the Ext.P2 shows that an amount of Rs.3500/- by way of cheque return charges are paid by the complainant on 22/09/16 and also it is seen that no balance amount is pending in total pre-closure account. This statement of account is duly signed by the authorised signatory of opposite parties bank and having an endorsement contract closed. This document is not challenged by the opposite parties.

 

From the opposite parties side the same loan account statement is produced and marked as Ext.R1. On perusing the documents also, it is seen that no balance amount is pending in this loan account. Then regarding the entry in the CIBIL site. On perusing Ext.P3 letter from Catholic Syrian Bank, it is seen that they rejected the loan application of the complainant due to reason of loan CIBIL Score.

 

This entry in the CIBIL site may be entered by the opposite parties bank, when the account of the complainant was irregular. But it is the bounden duty of the opposite parties bank to initiate immediate steps to charge the CIBIL status of a defaulter, when the loan account is cleared. Here it is very clear that the opposite parties bank was failed to withdrawn the CIBIL entry even after the

(Cont....4)

-4-

complainant cleared the loan dues. This is a gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties bank. Hence the opposite parties bank liable for the rejection of loan application of the complainant by the south Indian Bank.

 

On the basis of above discussion Forum is of a considered view that the version of the complainant can be believable and hence the complaint allowed. Opposite parties are directed to remove the complainant's loan No.2349400 from the CIBIL status as default.

 

Opposite parties 1 and 2 are further directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- for the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties 1 and 2, are further directed to pay Rs.3000/- as litigation cost. The above order shall comply within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the compensation amount shall carry 12% interest from the date of default till its payment.

 

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 31^st day of October, 2019.

 

Sd/-

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR (PRESIDENT)

Sd/-

SMT. ASAMOL P. (MEMBER)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Cont....5)

-5-

 

APPENDIX

 

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

Nil

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1 - Copy of RC book

Ext.P2 - Loan account statement

Ext.P3 - Letter from South Indians Bank, Nagarampara Branch produced by

the complainant

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Ext.R1 - Loan statement of account

 

Forwarded by Order,

 

 

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT