Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 56
Instituted on : 22.01.2021
Decided on : 24.08.2023.
Surender Singh S/o Sh. Balwan Singh R/o H.No. 1174/14, Mahavir Colony, Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
M/s Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, 1st Floor, Near HDFC Bank, Delhi Road, Rohtak through its Branch Manager. …….Opposite party.
COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,2019.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Ajmer Singh, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. J.K.Hooda, Advocate with Sh. Ashok Kumar Manager for the opposite party.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that he had purchased a Truck make Telco Ltd. and a loan against the same was sanctioned by opposite party vide loan account no. SA-656690 dated 30.04.2016 for an amount of Rs.10,61,446/-. The installments of 35 months for an amount of Rs.38,990/- was fixed for the said loan. It is further submitted that he has paid all the installments required by the opposite party and also paid the surcharge or extra service expenses to the opposite party in time. After clearing his loan amount the complainant has asked the opposite party for overdue shown in his loan account statement. On that, the opposite party has assured the complainant that the same will be removed and his account will be corrected. On the assurance of the opposite party, the complainant waited for some time and he had apply for the No Objection Certificate to remove the endorsement of HPA which is in the name of the opposite party in the registration certificate of the said vehicle. Due to Covid-19, the complainant could not contact the opposite party in the year 2020. On 12.01.2021, the complainant had got his loan account statement, the complainant came to know about the overdue amount i.e. Rs.1,75,342/- in his loan account statement. Complainant again inquired about the overdue and then Manager assured that the same will be adjusted, as he paid all the installments regularly but they did not pay any heed toward the request of complainant and ultimately the Branch Manager clearly refused to adjust the overdue amount and to issue the No Objection certificate of the said vehicle and to get remove the endorsement of HPA of the said vehicle in favour of the complainant. As such, there is deficiency on the part of the opposite party. Hence, the present complaint and it is prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to adjust the overdue amount and issue the No Objection Certificate & remove the endorsement of HPA enter in the name of the Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Delhi Road, Rohtak in the registration certificate of the said vehicle. It is also prayed that the opposite party be directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation and Rs. 20,000/- as litigation expenses to complainant as explained in relief clause.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in its reply has denied that the complainant has paid all the installments required by them and also paid the surcharge or extra service expenses to the opposite party in time and after repay the whole loan amount including interest and other charges upto April 2019. It is also denied that on the assurance of the opposite party, the complainant waited for some time and he had to apply for no objection certificate to remove the endorsement of HPA. The complainant had not paid all the installments as per schedule and also not paid the surcharge or extra service expenses to them in time. It is also submitted that complainant was informed about the overdue time to time, but the complainant did not pay any heed. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with cost.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavits Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C2 and has closed his evidence on dated 05.04.2022. Sh. Ashok Kumar, Manager of the opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex. RW1/A, documents Ex. R1 & Ex. R2 and has closed his evidence on 18.07.2023.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. Through this complaint the complainant has demanded no objection certificate and to remove the endorsement of HPA entered in the name of the Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. As per written statement filed by the respondent, the NOC could not be issued or the endorsement of HPA could not be cancelled as till date the dues are not cleared. As per the written statement an amount of Rs.175342/- was outstanding as overdue charges towards the complainant in his loan account statement. It has been further submitted in the written statement that the complainant has not paid all the installment as per scheduled time and also not paid the surcharge or extra charges to the respondent well within time. It is further submitted that the complainant was informed about the overdue charges but he did not give the ear on the request of the respondent.
6. We have minutely perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. In fact the loan amount of Rs.1061446/- has been advanced to the complainant by the respondent bank and as per loan agreement the amount was to be repaid in 35 monthly installments and EMI was Rs.38990/-. In this way the total EMI amount comes to Rs.1364650/-. The installment starts from 05.06.2016 to be paid by the complainant upto 05.04.2019. Perusal of account statement Ex.R1 itself show that the last EMI has been paid by the complainant on dated 28.04.2019. The perusal of this statement itself shows that the complainant has repaid the EMI slightly delayed but he has repaid the whole amount on 28.04.2019. We have perused the account statement placed on record as Ex.R1 and Ex.R2. The perusal of Ex.R1 itself shows that the respondent officials has wrongly charged collection charges in each and every month from June 2016 to April 2019. Moreover on 28.06.2017 legal charges has been charged from the complainant as Rs.5200/-. The respondent failed to place on record any document to prove that why these legal charges have been imposed upon the complainant or why the collection charges have been charged monthly. As per complainant he himself deposited the installments with the respondent bank. So collection charges have been wrongly charged from the complainant by the respondent bank. As the complainant was depositing the installment himself with the respondent bank so the respondent officials wrongly charged the collection charges from the complainant. Respondent has not placed on record any document to prove the fact that any official or employee of the bank ever visited in the house of complainant to collect the installment. So the opposite party has wrongly charged the legal charges and collection charges. As such there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and opposite party is liable to issue NOC and remove the endorsement of HPA. However, we have also noted that monthly installments have been belatedly paid by the complainant. Hence the complainant is liable to pay a lump-sum amount of Rs.20000/- on account of overdue charges to the opposite party.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby dispose of the complaint with direction to the complainant to pay the amount of Rs.20000/-(Rupees twenty thousand only) on account of overdue charges to the opposite party. On the other hand opposite party is directed to issue No Objection Certificate & to remove the endorsement of HPA entered in the name of Kotak Mahindra Bank in RC of truck bearing no.HR-46C-6599 of the complainant and also to pay Rs.10000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. Opposite party is further directed to adjust the alleged amount of Rs.15000/- in the amount payable by the complainant. As such complainant is liable to pay only Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) to the opposite party. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision.
8. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
24.08.2023
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
..........................................
Vijender Singh, Member.
