BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : WARANGAL
Present: Sri D.Chiranjeevi Babu
President.
Sri N.J.Mohan Rao,
Member.
AND
Smt. V.J. Praveena,
Member.
Tuesday the 06th May, 2008.
CONSUMER DISPUTE NO. 18/2007
Between:
Budugu Thirupathi Reddy,
S/o.Laxma Reddy,
Aged 43 years,
Occu.; E.P.Operator in
Singareni Colleries,
R/o.Qtr.No.T2-82481,
8-Incline Colony,
Godavarikhani,
Karimnagar District.
… Complainant
AND
1. The Personal Area Manager,
L.I.C. Housing Finance Limited,
Area Office, Warangal,
Opp.:Life Line Hospital, Hanamkonda,
Warangal District.
2. The L.I.C.Housing Finance Limited,
rep.by its.Area Manager,
Bangalore, Area Office: 4
Canara Mutual Building Residency Road,
Bangalore.
… Opposite Parties
Counsel for the Complainant : Sri. A.Venkata Chary, Advocate
Counsel for the Opposite Party : Sri. Dussa Janardhan, Advocate
This complaint coming for final hearing before this Forum, the Forum pronounced the following Order.
:: ORDER ::
Sri D.Chiranjeevi Babu President
This is a complaint filed by the complainant Budugu Thirupathi Reddy against the Opposite parties under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for a direction to grant Rs.1,56,500/- towards damages and other expenses with 24% interest per annum till full realisation of the said amount, jointly and severally from the opposite parties.
The brief averments contained in the complaint filed by the complainant are as follows:
The complainant is the owner and possessor of 242 Square Yards of house plot situated in Survey No.239 in Maruthinagar, Karimnagar. The complainant construct a new house in the above said plot obtained permission from Municipal Corporation, Karimnagar on 03-11-2005, the estimated is around Rs.8,00,000/-. The complainant is the permanent employee of Singareni Colleries, residing at the address shown above. The complainant came to know that the opposite party No.1 which is an organisation constituted by the opposite party No.2 to sanction housing loans in the Districts of Warangal, Adilabad, Karimnagar and Khammam is arranging housing loans for employees and also others. The complainant approached the opposite party No.1 and applied for a house loan. The opposite party No.1 asked to complainant in different types of documents with processing fee, the complainant fulfilled the all formalities. The complainant was informed that he was sanctioned a housing loan of Rs.6,50,000/- vide file No.854848, dated 17-04-2006. The complainant was sanctioned a housing loan under scheme “Griha Prakash” and loan amount of Rs.6,50,000/- the rate of interest is 8.25% P.A. for the terms of repayment of loan is 17 years in 204 E.M.Is. @ Rs.3,250/-per month. The complainant purchased the building construction material to an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- when the construction was in progress. The complainant approached the opposite party No.1 to releasing of housing loan amount, but the opposite party No.2 informed through opposite party No.1 that the complainant cannot be sanctioned any amount of house loan on some false and frivolous grounds. The complainant is claim Rs.1,50,000/- towards damages for the deficiency of service and also Rs.3,890/- towards processing fee and others.
The complainant prays that the Hon’ble Forum for its indulgence in recovering the damages and other expenses from the Opposite parties who are jointly and severally liable to pay the same.
Opposite Party filed the Written Version contending in brief as follows:
The complainant made an application to the opposite party No.1 for mortgage loan on 12-02-2006. Thereafter, the complainant submitted some of the documents pertaining to his house properties situated at Karimnagar Town and he paid processing charges before sanctioning the loan for verification of title, inspection of his property and to obtain legal opinion etc. after verification of the documents submitted by him and inspection of his property, the LIC Housing Finance Ltd., Warangal has not considered the application of the complainant since the opposite party has not satisfied the documents submitted by him to sanction the mortgage loan. The opposite party rejected the application and intimated the same on 31-07-2006 and returned all the documents. As per the terms and conditions of the loan application the applicant is not entitled for the return of processing fee. The opposite party returned the all documents on 31-07-06 itself. But, the applicant with the malafide intention issued a notice on 21-11-2006 with false allegations. The complainant has not submitted the required documents pertaining to his property.
Inspite of service of notice on opposite party No.2, opposite party No.2 called absent, hence this Forum set exparte.
The complainant in support of his claim filed his Affidavit in the form of chief examination and marked Exs.A-01 to A-22. On behalf of opposite party Sri D.Janardhan filed his Affidavit in the form of chief examination and marked Ex.B-1 & B-7.
Now the point for consideration whether the complainant is entitled to get to get an amount of Rs.1,56,500/- along with costs from the Opposite Party.
In this case the complainant is having site situated in Survey No.239 in Maruthinagar, Karimnagar Town and District and he wants to construct a house in the said plot and applied for permission from Municipal Corporation, Karimnagar on 03-11-2005 the estimation is cost of Rs.8,00,000/- and he is permanent employee of Singareni Colleries and he came to know that the opposite party No.1 which is an organisation constituted by the opposite party No.2 to sanction housing loans in the Districts of Warangal, Adilabad, Karimnagar and Khammam is arranging housing loans for employees and also others. Thereafter he approached the Opposite Party No.1 and applied for house loan then the Opposite Party No.1 asked the complainant to submit various documents such as Original Sale Deed, Link documents and title deeds pahanies for last 15 years, Encumbrance Certificate, Municipal Permission in the initial course. Subsequently the opposite party No.1
The complainant asked to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards Civil estimates apart from a processing fees he also paid same. Further after incurred huge amounts by the complainant and got the all documents and submitted to the opposite party No.1. The opposite party No.1 informed the complainant that he was sanctioned a house loan of Rs.6,50,000/- dated 17-04-2006 vide in file No.854848. Thereafter for loan of Rs.6,50,000/- @ 8.25% per annum and term for repayment of loan is 17 years in 204 E.M.Is. @ Rs.3,250/- per month. After receiving the loan sanctioned letter from the opposite party No.1 the complainant arranged post dated blank cheques drawn in favour of the opposite party and also indemnity bond and guarantee bond which are duly notarized by the authorized notary. After receiving the sanctioned letter the opposite party No.1 gave green signal for the complainant to start the construction. Then he started construction after got amount from the Kith and Kin a tune of Rs.2,00,000/-. Thereafter he stopped the work due to lack of funds i.e. on 31-07-2006. Thereafter the complainant approached the opposite party No.1 for releasing of housing loan amount, but the opposite party No.2 informed through opposite party No.1 the complainant cannot be sanctioned any amount of house loan on some false and frivolous grounds. Thereafter the complainant requested the opposite party No.1 not to stop the loan amount but stop to refused that the complainant. The opposite party No.1 filed their written version stating that it is true that the complainant has applied loan from opposite parties 1 & 2 but the documents supplied by the complainant, they have not at all valued documents and there are some variations in to many after gone through the documents supplied by the complainant by opposite parties 1 & 2, they refused to give house loans to the complainant.
After arguments of the both side counsels, we come to the conclusion that what the opposite parties 1 & 2 are did is in a correct manner because as per them i.e. the opposite party has got the discretionary powers either to sanction the loan or reject the loan, even after payment of such processing fee. Further as per the terms and conditions of the loan application and declaration the applicant is not entitled for the return of processing fee. Said processing fee is not refundable by propaganda, if loan applicable either considers or rejected by propaganda. As per Ex.B-1 in last para i.e. a declaration given by the appellant that I/We further agree that my loan shall be governed by the rules of LICHFL, which may be in force from time to time. I/We understand that the processing Fees, Upfront Fees and Administrative Fees are not refundable under any circumstances, and the loan sanction or rejection is at the sole discretion of LICHFL, even after payment of such fees.So Ex.B-1 mentioned like above if the Insurance i.e. 1 & 2 if they reject the loan amount no one has to question because the said condition already is there in Ex.B-1. The complainant got signed the Ex.B-1. Further the documents supplied by the complainant it is only pahani and sale deed in sale deed the name of the complainant is mentioned in pahani some other names are mentioned so the documents filed by the complainant the names are not tailed in Ex.B-5 pahani so many name are mentioned i.e. Nedhunuri Manohar Rao, Nedhunuri Venkatram Rao, Nedhunuri Laxman Rao, Nedhunuri Madhusudhana Rao, Uppula Leelamma, N.Chandraiah in second one Nedhunuri Venkata Rama Rao, Uppula Leelamma, N.Chandraiah and likewise in other pahani so many but the name of the B.Thirupathi Reddy i.e. the complainant is name is not mentioned in pahani so the documents filed by the complainant is not tailed with his name with the sale deed. So what ever the Opposite Parties 1 &2 have did is in a correct manner i.e. the reason only the LIC authorities have reject the loan to the complainant. From Ex.B-1 condition it is clear that if the LIC authorities not satisfied with the documents certainly they have to reject and also they get discretionary powers. The complainant has no business to question about the rejection of his loan amount before Opposite Parties 1 & 2 because already he agreed in Ex.B-1 i.e. the loan already sanctioned and he has signed on it. So he has no right to ask about the rejection of loan before the Opposite Parties 1 & 2.
For the foregoing reasons given by us, there are no any point to allow this application and the complainant is not entitled to get any amount of Rs.1,56,000/- what ever the Opposite Parties 1 & 2 have did they are in a correct manner.
In the result there are no merits in the complaint filed by the complainant and accordingly the same is dismissed but without costs.
06th May, 2008).
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
Member Member President,
District Consumer Forum, Warangal.
APPENDIX OF EVIDNECE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
ON BEHALF OF O.P.
Affidavit of Complainant Affidavit of Opposite Party
EXHIBITS MARKED
ON BEHALFOF COMPLAINANT
1. Ex.A-1 is the Xerox copy of Agreement of sale-cum-general power of attorney (with possession), dated 02-03-2005.
2. Ex.A-2 is the Xerox copy of Deed of Rectification Deed,
dated 20-07-2005.
3. Ex.A-3 is the Original Encumbrance Certificate, dtd.:26-06-2006.
4. Ex.A-4 is the Xerox copy of Registered Sale Deed, dated 14-03-05.
5. Ex.A-5 is the Xerox copy of Deed of Rectification, dated 9-08-2005
6. Ex.A-6 is the Xerox copy of Pahanies for the years 1990-91 to 2004-2005.
7. Ex.A-7 is the Xerox copy of Proceeding of Karimnagar Municipal Corporation, dated 03-11-2005.
8. Ex.A-8 is the Xerox copy of Encumbrance Certificates.
9. Ex.A-9 is the Form of L.I.C.Housing Finance Limited.
10. Ex.A-10 is the Statement of State Bank of Hyderabad.
11. Ex.A-11 is the Xerox copy of Letter of authorization & consent for disbursement.
12. Ex.A-12 is the Xerox copy of undertaking by Employee in Rs.20/- stamp paper and indemnify bond.
13. Ex.A-13 is the Xerox copy of L.I.C.Housing Finance Limited Deviation Affidavit.
14. Ex.A-14 is the Xerox copies of Kola Anna Reddy, approved valuer.
15. Ex.A-15 is the Xerox copies of identify proof.
16. Ex.A-16 is the Original L.I.C.Housing Finance Ltd., dtd.:17-04-06.
17. Ex.A-17 is the Original Deviation Affidavit and Identity Bond.
18. Ex.A-18 is the Original Deed of Undertaking.
19. Ex.A-19 is the To whom so ever it may concern.
20. Ex.A-20 is the (3) acknowledgement receipts.
21. Ex.A-21 is the Pay Order and L.I.C.Housing Finance Limited Receipts, dated 27-06-2006
22. Ex.A-22 is the Check Book of LIC Housing Finance Limited.
23. Ex.A-23 is the Letter of Gruha Pravesh.
24. Ex.A-24 is the Index Book containing Book Let.
ON BEHALF OF Opposite parties
1. Ex.B-1 is the Original application for Housing Loan, dt:12-02-06.
2. Ex.B-2 is the Letter to B.Thirupathi Reddy, dt: 31-07-2006.
3. Ex.B-3 is the Letter to B.Thirupathi Reddy, dt: 17-04-2006.
4. Ex.B-4 is the Legal Notice issued by Dussa Janardhan,
5. Ex.B-5 is the Returned Cover with acknowledgement card.
6. Ex.B-6 is the Original Postal Receipt.
7. Ex.B-7 is the Letter to L.I.C. Housing Finance.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT.
