Complainant Surjit Singh has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (for short, C.P.Act.) seeking necessary directions to the opposite parties to continue the previous loan on the same terms and conditions by adjusting the excess amount paid by him in new loan in the shape of installments, document and  file charges etc. alongwith interest @ 9% and also to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- for the mental harassment, agony, inconvenience, insult and also to pay Rs.20,000/-as litigation expenses, which he has incurred.

2.        The case of the complainant in brief is that in the month of March 2016 he applied for tractor loan on his Mahindra Tractor bearing Registration No.PB06-V-7169 from the opposite parties amounting to Rs.3,50,000/- vide loan agreement No.GURDS0603160009 and same was sanctioned by the opposite parties but  they transferred only Rs.3,36,530/- as loan amount in the bank account of Allahabad Bank Branch Dinanagar bearing Account No.50318060264 on 17.3.2016. At the time of advancement of loan the matter was amicably settled between him and the opposite parties that the said loan amount will be repayable in 48 installments of Rs.2,000/- P.M. plus Rs.70,000/- yearly/ for four years. He was repaying the installments regularly and Rs.57,530/- had been paid upto 30.4.2017 to the opposite parties. He has further pleaded that in the month of May 2017 the outstanding amount in the loan account was Rs.2,79,000/-. He requested to the opposite parties that it is very difficult for him to arrange yearly installment of Rs.70,000/-, so to rearrange the installments schedule and convert the yearly installment into monthly installment. He has next pleaded that the opposite parties asked him that now the monthly installment of his loan has been rescheduled at Rs.13,000/- PM instead of Rs.2000/- PM plus Rs.70,000/- yearly installments. But surprisingly now it came to him that the monthly installment of repayment of his loan has not been changed, but fresh loan has not been changed, fresh loan agreement has been executed by the opposite parties and loan amount has been increased to Rs.4,48,000/- instead of outstanding amount of Rs.2,79,000/- and tenure of repayment of loan has also been increased from 48 installment to 60 installments.  The opposite parties have also increased the rate of interest from the earlier rate of interest. He has further pleaded that he has only received Rs.3,36,530/- as loan amount in his bank account of Allahabad Bank Branch Dinanagar bearing Account No.50318060264 on 17.3.2016 but now the opposite parties are claiming that he has taken loan of Rs.4,48,000/- and they are charging higher rate of interest on the higher loan figure illegally and forcefully.  Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

 3.        Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite parties who appeared through their counsel and filed their written reply taking the preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable; the jurisdiction of this Ld. Commission is barred to the complainant against the opposite parties as there is an arbitration agreement between the complainant  and the opposite parties to raise all the disputes, issues, rights and liabilities before the Arbitrator only; the complainant has not come to the Ld. Commission with clean hands and has filed this false and frivolous complaint against the opposite parties and the complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint against the opposite parties. On merits, it was submitted the complainant had entered into a loan agreement vide No. GURDS070624003 dated 27.6.2017 for a loan amounting of Rs.4,48,000/- and  agreed to return the same alongwith interest in 60 equal installments.  It was next submitted that the complainant has wished for fresh loan agreement for a loan amount of Rs.4,48,000/- due to him on 27.6.2017 as he was not paying the loan installments regularly.  The opposite parties are charging the agreed rate of interest from the complainant. The complainant has filed this false and frivolous complaint to illegally harass the officials of the opposite parties to avoid the payment of due loan instalments. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

4.      Complainant has tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C-1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-4 and closed the evidence.

5.     Ld.counsel for the opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Satish Kumar Special Power of attorney Ex.OP-1, copy of loan hypothecation agreement Ex.OP-2 and copy of account statement Ex.OP-3  and closed the evidence.

6.    We have carefully gone through the pleadings of counsel for the both parties; oral arguments advanced by their respective counsels and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsel for the complainant for the purposes of adjudication of the present complaint.

7.      As detailed above, the present complaint is regarding enhancement of loan amount in arbitrary manner by opposite party and also revising the terms and conditions of loan sought for purchase of tractor. Complainant has further alleged that principal of loan amount has been increased and also the monthly installments enhanced.

8.     Refinancing new loan is disputed by the complainant and has out rightly denied having agreed to such alleged revised agreement. In view of this peculiar situation perhaps this Commission may not decide this complaint on the basis of affidavit and pleadings in a summary manner.

9.      The disputed refinance in question requires detail and elaborate evidence for coming to a just conclusion. In view of this, we are of this considered opinion that this complaint can be best disposed off by giving directions to the parties. Hence, we direct the complainant to approach the Civil Court for proper redressal of grievance. Present complaint stands disposed off accordingly.  

10.        The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.

11.    Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges.  file be consigned.                                                                                                                                                               

            (Naveen Puri)

                                                                            President   

Announced:                                                   (R.S.Sukhija)

May 05, 2022                                                       Member

*MK*