30.01.2015.

MRIDULA ROY, MEMBER.

The instant appeal is directed against the judgment and order being No. 15 dated 27.092012 passed by the Ld. District Forum, Kolkata, Unit – I in Complaint Case No. 150/2011 allowing the same on contest against the O.Ps with cost, directing the O.Ps to issue no due certificate jointly and severally in favour of the Complainant and further directing to credit a sum of Rs.60,435/- only in the account of the Complainant with an interest of 9% per annum from the date of debit of the said amount till the date of the credit, further directing the O.Ps to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.3,000/- only to the Complainant within 45 days from the date of communication of the order, in default an interest @ 9% shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the Complainant till full realization. 

Being aggrieved by this order the O.Ps preferred the instant appeal.

The case of the Complainant, in brief, is that he availed of personal loan sanctioned and disbursed by the O.Ps to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- which was repayable by 36 Equated Monthly Instalments @ Rs.20,145/- scheduled to be started on and from 01.03.2008.  Accordingly, the Complainant started repayment of the loan by paying scheduled EMIs through ECS from his Bank A/c No. 01870200062133 lying with the State Bank of India, Sodepur Branch.  However, in August, 2009 the Complainant requested the O.Ps to inform him the then present status of his loan account since he desired to liquidate of the said loan and the O.Ps informed that the outstanding amount was of Rs.2,90,739/- and the Complainant had to pay the same if he wanted to liquidate the said loan.  Accordingly, the Complainant paid an amount of Rs.2,90,740/- by an account payee cheque bearing No. 510380 dated 01.09.2009 drawn on SBI, Sodepur Branch, but even after that the O.Ps realized three more instalments @ Rs.20,145/- and in this way Rs.60,435/- in total.  The Complainant asked the O.Ps on several occasions to refund the said amount bout to no avail and being frustrated with the activities of the O.Ps the Complainant served an advocate’s letter dated 19.11.2010 upon the O.Ps demanding refund of the said amount but that too was of no avail.  Hence, the Complainant has filed the instant petition of complaint praying for direction upon the O.Ps to pay a penalty to the tune of Rs.60,435/- to the Complainant, to pay an interest @ 18% per annum accrued on the aforesaid amount, to pay Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation for causing harassment and to pay the cost of litigation.

The O.Ps contested the case by filing Written Version denying and disputing all the material allegations stating inter alia, that in December, 2009 the Complainant approached the O.Ps for liquidation of the loan account and, accordingly, a discussion was held between the parties and the loan account of the Complainant was liquidated.  It was mentioned in the Written Version that in the month of September, 2009 the Complainant approached the O.Ps for liquidation of the said loan and paid an amount of Rs.2,90,740/- towards the same.

After liquidation of the loan account the O.Ps issued a no objection certificate along with a refund cheque bearing No. 31182 dated 29.01.2010 of Rs.14,733/- being the excess amount at the time of closing of the loan which was received by the Complainant.

In the Written Version the O.Ps specifically stated that on the basis of the terms of settlement the Complainant liquidated the loan amount and also received the excess amount by cheque.

In course of hearing of the appeal the Ld. Advocate for the Appellants has submitted that the Complainant obtained a personal loan of Rs.5,00,000/- vide agreement dated 25.01.2008.  The Complainant expressed his desire for liquidation of the loan in August, 2009 and thereafter, in January, 2010 the loan was liquidated and, therefore, the three instalments were realized through ECS from the bank account of the Complainant.  However, it is found that an excess amount of Rs.14,733/- was also realized on the same was refunded to the Complainant by cheque which the Complainant received.  The Ld. Advocate for the Appellants has further stated that the Complainant – Respondent is not entitled to any amount from the bank since the loan account was closed and NOC has been issued.

Respondent was absent on repeated calls.

Having heard submission made by the Ld. Advocate for the Appellants and on perusal of the papers on record it appears that evidently the Bank made a refund of Rs.14,733/- towards excess amount and the Complainant received the same.  It is the specific contention of the Appellants that realization of the instalment which was made through ECS was duly taken into consideration at the time of final settlement and on the basis of the discussion between the Complainant and the O.Ps.  However, as per petition of complaint the outstanding amount was of Rs.2,90,739/- which was duly paid by the Complainant.  But the Appellants have stated that the Complainant paid the amount in December 2009/January, 2010 and, therefore, the amount varied.  It is submitted by the Ld. Advocate for the Appellants that NOC has been issued in respect of the loan account.  Therefore, the Complainant – Respondent’s contention that he is entitled to get refund of the amount which was deducted through 3 ECS from his bank account is not acceptable.

In the result, the appeal succeeds.

Hence, ORDERED, that the appeal is allowed without cost.  The impugned judgment is set aside.  The petition of complaint is dismissed.