Delhi

New Delhi

CC/898/2008

Manoj Kumar Razdan - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. ABN Amro Bank - Opp.Party(s)

24 Feb 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/898/08                        Dated:

In the matter of:

Sh. Manoj Kumar Razdan,

D-61/11, Dilshad Colony, Delhi-95

……..COMPLAINANT

       

VERSUS

 

 

ABN Amro Bank,

Hansalaya Building, 15-Barakhamba Road,

New Delhi-110001

                                         ………. OPPOSITE PARTY

 

ORDER

President:  C.K Chaturvedi

The complainant, who held credit card account with OP on repeated persuasion to avail easy loan, agreed to take a loan of Rs.50,000/-based on telephonic talks. The bank sent him a cheque of Rs.48,903/-, after deducting processing fee and service tax on it. The said loan was payable in 48 equal installments of Rs.2750/- each. He paid EMIs from February 06 to June 06, and thereafter paid the entire outstanding along with prepayment penalty on 13.7.06 by depositing Rs.45,306/-intimated to him to clear the loan. It is alleged despite the payment in Jan 2008, the bank informed him that there was outstanding of Rs.8,108/-. He took up the matter and he was asked to clear the amount with 3%closure charges and thereafter again initiate request of closure of account, which shows that OP was not in the habit of closing personal loan accounts even after receiving the complete payment with penalty charges. Therefore this complaint of deficiency under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

The OP has filed a reply which states that complainant was issued credit card and he was bound by the terms and conditions of credit card and charges on it etc. but have failed to rebut the payment of Rs.45,306/- along with prepayment closure charges. IT only harps of outstanding of Rs.9,465/-without explaining how the outstanding if any on account of financial or other charges were both included while settling the loan account by charging Rs.45,306/-along with pre closure penalty charges, almost 18 months before this fresh demand was made.

We have considered the rival case and material on record and submissions made. We find that OP has simply indulged in unfair practice of keeping the loan account alive to levy and collect money by way of charges, which it is unable to explain. We hold OP guilty of deficiency in service and quash the additional demand raised in 2008 or stated in the reply. We award compensation of Rs.10,000/- to complainant for deficiency, harassment and Rs.10000/- for litigation expenses.

The order shall be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

 

 

        Pronounced in open Court on 24.02.2015.

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

(S.R. CHAUDHARY)                 (RITU GARODIA)

MEMBER                          MEMBER