Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/188/2019

M R Navaneetha krishnan & Another - Complainant(s)

Versus

PNB Hosusing Finance Ltd., & Another - Opp.Party(s)

P Ulaganathan

27 Oct 2022

ORDER

Date of Complaint Filed : 09.07.2019

Date of Reservation      : 26.09.2022

Date of Order               : 27.10.2022

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT: TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                           : PRESIDENT

                    THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,           :  MEMBER  I 

                   THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,    : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 188/2019

THURSDAY, THE 27^th DAY OF OCTOBER 2022

1. M.R.Navaneetha Krishnan,

Aged 49 years,

 S/o M.Ramiah,

No11/6, B Block,

Panduranga Enclave,

Parthasarathy Nagar,

8^thStreet, Adambakkam,

Chennai, Tamilnadu-600 088

 

2. N Aarthi, Aged 48 years.

W/o M. R Navaneetha Krishnan,

No.11/6, B Block, Panduranga Enclave,

Parthasarathy Nagar, 8^thStreet,

Adambakkam,

Chennai, Tamilnadu-600 088.                                        …   Complainants

Vs.

1.PNB Housing Finance Ltd,

   9^thFloor, Antriksh Bhavan,

   22, Kasturba Gandhi Marg,

   Near Connaught Place,

   New Delhi 110 001.

 

2.PNB Housing Finance Ltd,

   3^rd Floor, Sudershan Building,

   No. 14, Whites Road,

   Royapettai, Chennai-600 014.                                    ...  Opposite Parties

 

******

Counsel for the Complainant             : M/s. P Ulaganathan

Counsel for the Opposite Parties        : Exparte

 

        On perusal of records and after hearing the oral argument of the Counsel for the Complainant, we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by Member-I, Thiru. T.R.Sivakumhar, B.A., B.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to pay Rs.14,667/- towards the amounts wrongfully deducted from the account of the Complainant and to pay  a sum of Rs.2640/- interest at the rate of 18% and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards legal expenses and Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony.

2.The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

 

The complainants had already availed of housing from the Opposite Parties. Their main housing loan was still outstanding, they were repaying said loan regularly, they applied for top up loan for housing purpose with the opposite parties. Top up loan of Rs. 5,05,000- was sanctioned by the Opposite Parties of which Rs.4,81,000/- being the actual loan amount and Rs.24,000/- being the insurance amount and the same was intimated through their emails dated 26.11.2018 and 29.11.2018. By another email dated 30.11.2018, they forwarded Welcome Letter, Disbursement Advice and Disbursement Letter, with reference to the Loan Account Number NHL/CHE/118/607970, to them. In the letter dated 29.11.2018 it was mentioned that the loan amount i.e. Rs.5,05,000/- was to be disbursed to the complainants on 29.11.2018, subject to fulfillment of certain conditions that includes that Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds to be registered in favour of PNBHFL. In terms of the sanction, they submitted a post dated cheque for a sum of Rs.1490/- towards 1^st instalment and another cheque for Rs.6604/- from the Bank account maintained by him with Bank of India, towards 2^nd instalment. For the remaining instalments up to 120 instalments he submitted an ECS authority to the Opposite Parties for deduction of the instalments from his savings account in Bank of India. The opposite party acknowledged the receipt of the complainant's cheque No. 075139 for a sum of Rs.6604/-. The second Opposite Party, who is the local branch in Chennai and was the authority overseeing the loan sanction and disbursement required him to pay a sum of Rs.9575/-, to an Agent of the Bank, that included the amounts of Rs.2525/- and Rs.5050/- payable to Sub-Registrar as fees and Rs.2000/-towards expenses. They were willing to pay for the prescribed fees and legitimate expenses, they were not interested in paying to any intermediary and be a party to an illegal transaction. Hence, they had offered to get the registration of the MOD of title deeds done, at their own cost, if the MOD was prepared and duly executed by the competent authority in the office of the second Opposite Party and handed over to them for registration. But, the Opposite Party insisted that they had to do it through their agents to whom the above money was to be paid by them. As per the instructions of the second opposite party, the complainants kept ready two demand drafts for Rs.2525/- and Rs.5050/- in favour of the Sub Registrar concerned. However, in view of the change in the procedure of registration, that came into effect immediately thereafter whereby the payment of fees was to be made online, they had to cancel the demand drafts. As they were not willing to pay any amount to the intermediaries for the purpose of registration of the MOD, the opposite parties took a stand that the beneficiary had to do the needful for registration of MOD. In these circumstances, they did not want to avail of the loan already sanctioned and accordingly intimated the opposite parties by his email dated 19.12.2018 that they do not require the loan and hence requested them to cancel it and return all the documents. The said email dated 19.12.2018 was acknowledged by the opposite parties, by email dated 19.12.2018. He sent a reminder dated 02.01.2019. The opposite parties had not disbursed the loan amount, although the date of disbursement was supposed to be 29.11.2018. Even without disbursing the loan amount, the opposite parties realised the cheque that he had submitted with them for Rs.6604/- towards first instalment of the loan on 10.01.2019. Through email dated 24.01.2019 they had objected to the deduction of Instalment even when no amount of loan was actually disbursed. Another reminder by email dated 31.01.2019 was sent seeking cancellation of the loan. Further he had personally handed over a letter dated 04.02.2019 to the second Opposite Party seeking cancellation and return of the amount already recovered from them. When they were hoping that the loan sanction would be cancelled and the amounts of instalments wrongfully collected from them would be refunded, they received an email dated 26.02.2019 which required them to submit encumbrance certificate for the period covering last 13 years and the Original of the registered MODT. This message appeared as if they were totally oblivious of their request for cancellation of loan sanction. Hence, the complainant by mail dated 28.02.2019 brought to their notice about their pending request for cancellation of loan sanction, which was duly acknowledged by email dated 28.02.2019. At last, they received a reply email dated 26.03.2019 from the opposite party stating that they would refund the amount received through NEFT. Meanwhile, he made a request by letter dated 09.04.2019, to the Bank of India who was given ECS authorization for remittance of monthly instalments of Rs.6604/- to the opposite parties, from his S/B Account, to cancel the ECS authority. However, on verification of the bank statement of Bank of India, three payments of Rs.6604/- each by way of cheque and through ECS, on 10.01.2019, 11.02.2019 and 11.03.2019 respectively were made to the opposite parties. Acting on his request for cancellation of ECS authorization the Bank of India did not allow payment of any further instalments and hence no amount of instalment was recovered by opposite parties after 11.03.2019. On 11.04.2019, the opposite parties refunded to the complainants account a sum of Rs.5145/- and duly intimated the same by email dated 12.04.2019. They had informed the 2^nd opposite party telephonically that three instalments had been paid by them and all of them had to be refunded completely. To that effect, the complainant sent a message to the opposite party by email dated 12.04.2019. He had sent a notice dated 29.04.2019 seeking refund of the entire amount of Rs.14,667/-, which was due to be refunded by the opposite parties. The opposite parties have chosen to ignore the notices till date. Hence the complaint.

3.  The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-19  were marked.

4.   The Opposite Parties did not appear before this commission even sufficient notice served and remained absent and set exparte.

 

Points for Consideration

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled to?

Point No.1:-

The disputed fact of the Complainant is that in spite of accepting the cancellation of top up loan amount of Rs.5,05,000/- which was sanctioned by the Opposite Parties, they had debited three instalments of Rs.6604/- each, without disbursing the said Loan amount and thereafter on request made by the Complainants, only a sum of Rs.5145/- was credited to the 1^st Complainant’s SB account and the Opposite Parties were duly liable to refund the remaining sum of Rs.14,667/- to them.

         On careful reading of the Complaint and exhibits marked in support of the complaint, it is clear from the perusal of Ex.A-1 to A-4 Emails dated 26.11.2018, 29.11.2018, 30.11.2018 and 18.12.2018, top up loan to the tune of Rs.5,05,000/- was sanctioned by the Opposite Parties to the Complainants and the payment of instalment for a sum of Rs.6604/- by way of post dated cheque issued by the 1^st Complainant was acknowledged by the Opposite Parties. As per Ex.A-5 Email dated 19.12.2018 the 1^st Complainant had requested to cancel the top up loan and to return back their documents, as they were not informed about the charges for registering Memorandum of Deposit of tile deeds and expenses for the same. From Ex.A-6 reply mail dated 19.12.2018, the Opposite Parties mentioned to respond within two working days. As per Ex.A-7 the 1^st Complainant had sent a email dated 02.01.2019 wherein it was mentioned that as no one contacted them, requested to cancel the top up loan account and return back all his Post dated cheques and processing fees of Rs.2950/- at the earliest. As there was response, the 1^st Complainant had sent email reminders on 24.01.2019 and 31.01.2019 as found in Exs.A-8 and A-9, though the Opposite Parties had responded to the said mails, had sought for 2 workings days to respond to the said mails, as evidenced from Exs.A-8 and A-9. As per Ex.A-10, Letter dated 04.02.2019 was addressed to the 2^nd Opposite Party, requesting them to cancel the top up loan account and for reimbursement of 1^st Instalment amount of Rs.6604/- and to return the balance post dated cheques. From Ex.A-11 Email dated 26.02.2019 sent by the Opposite Parties to the Complainants, the Opposite Parties in spite of receipt of several request made by the Complainants to cancel the top up loan account, had sought for submission of the pending documents of Encumbrance Certificate for 13 years and the original MODT, from the Complainant, for which by Ex.A-12 the 1^st Complainant had sent a reply mail dated 26.02.2019 wherein it was mentioned that they had sent several reminders regarding cancellation of Loan account and in this regard has submitted a letter dated 04.02.2019 in writing and the same was attached in said mail, on receipt of the said mail the Opposite Parties had sent a reply mail dated 26.02.2019 stating within 2 working days they would respond. From the perusal of Ex.A-14 mail dated 26.03.2019 sent by the Opposite Parties to the Complainants, the Opposite Parties had agreed to refund the amount received through NEFT. As per Ex.A-18 Bank Statement of 1^stComplainant, a sum of Rs.6604/- was debited on 10.01.2019, 11.02.2019 and 11.03.2019 towards top up loan account by the Opposite Parties, were evidenced. Though the Opposite Parties as per their mail dated 26.03.2019 had agreed to refund the amounts received from the Complainant, as in spite of several requests and reminders sent by the Complainants to cancel the top up loan account and return back their PDC’s, the Opposite Parties had debited three instalments without disbursing the Loan amount, from the Bank Account of the 1^st Complainant, the 1^st Complainant through Ex.A-15 Letter dated 09.04.2019 had intimated to his Bank, namely, Bank of India, to stop ECS on 11^th day of every month. From the perusal of Ex.A-16 mail dated 12.04.2019 sent by the Opposite Parties to the Complainants, it was found that refund for a sum of Rs.5145.06p was processed on 08.04.2019 and as per Ex.A-18 the said sum of Rs.5145.06p was found to be credited to the 1^st Complainant’s Bank account. Thereafter the Complainants had sent mail dated 12.04.2019, as found in Ex.A-17 and a notice dated 29.04.2019 to the Opposite Parties seeking refund of the balance amount of  Rs.14,667/-, as found in Ex.A-19.

On the discussion made above and in the facts and circumstances of the case, it is clear that the Opposite Parties had committed gross negligence by not taking into the account of the several requests made by the Complainants to cancel the top up loan account as found in EX.A-7 and without having disbursed the Loan amount to the Complainants had deducted three instalments to a sum of Rs.6604/- each. Further in spite of the requests and reminders sent by the Complainants to refund the first instalment of Rs.6604/- deducted from his bank account, as found in Ex.A-10 Letter dated 04.02.2019, the Opposite Parties had deducted 2^nd and 3^rd Instalments on 11.02.2019 and 11.03.2019 as found in Ex.A-18. In spite of the requests made by the Complainants to refund the said three instalment amounts that were deducted by the Opposite Parties without even disbursing the Loan amount to them, the Opposite Parties in lethargic and negligent manner had sent a mail dated 26.03.2019 as found in Ex.A-17 and had refunded only a sum of Rs.5145.06p as against the deduction of three instalments of Rs.6604/- each and in spite of requests for refund of remaining amount of Rs.14,667/- the Opposite Parties had failed to refund the same. Hence, we hold that the Opposite Parties had acted negligently in refunding the amounts that were wrongly deducted from the 1^st Complainant’s bank account without even disbursing the top up loan amount to the Complainants. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the Opposite Parties had committed deficiency of service and had caused mental agony to the Complainants. Accordingly Point No.1 is answered.

Point Nos.2 &3:-

As discussed and decided Point No.1 against the Opposite Parties 1 and 2 the Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are liable to refund a sum of Rs.14,667/- towards the amounts wrongfully deducted from the Complainants account and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards deficiency of service and mental agony caused to the Complainant along with cost of Rs.3,000/-. Accordingly, Point Nos.2 and 3 are answered.

In the result the Complaint is allowed in part. The opposite parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally directed to refund a sum of Rs.14,667/- (Rupees Fourteen Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Seven Only) towards the amounts wrongfully deducted from the Complainant’s account and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) towards deficiency of service and mental agony caused to the Complainant along with cost of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand Only) to the Complainant, within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the above amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of receipt of this order till the date of realisation.

In the result the Complaint is allowed.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 27^th of October 2022. 

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1	26.11.2018	Approval of Loan
Ex.A2	29.11.2018	Approval of Loan
Ex.A3	30.11.2018	Welcome letter, disbursement advice and disbursement letter
Ex.A4	18.12.2018	Acknowledgment of Post date cheque
Ex.A5	19.12.2018	Request for cancellation of the loan
Ex.A6	19.12.2018	Acknowledgement of the request for cancellation of loan
Ex.A7	02.01.2019	Reminder to close the loan
Ex.A8	24.01.2019	Request for reversal of the wrongful deduction of 1st instalment
Ex.A9	31.01.2019	Reminder
Ex.A10	04.02.2019	Request for cancellation reimbursement of loan in writing to 2nd Opposite Party in person
Ex.A11	26.02.2019	Demand from Opposite Party to Deposite Encumbrance certificate and original of the Registered MODT
Ex.A12	28.02.2019	Reminder
Ex.A13	28.02.2019	Acknowledgement of letter dated 28.02.2019
Ex.A14	26.03.2019	Intimation from Opposite Party reg. Refund of the amount received through NEFT
Ex.A15	09.04.2019	Cancellation to ECS to Bank of India
Ex.A16	12.04.2019	Intimation of refund of IR 5145.06
Ex.A17	12.04.2019	Request for refund of balance amount
Ex.A18	20.04.2019	Bank statement of Bank of India
Ex.a19	29.04.2019	Notice to the Opposite Parties

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Party:-

 

NIL

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                   B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT