Case of complainant Vishal Chaudhary is that ‘Jalandhar Improvement Trust, Jalandhar’ had invited applications from general public for allotment  of residential plots, on freehold basis, under the name & style ‘Surya Enclave Extension’. Residential plots were to be allotted, amongst the applicants on the basis of draw of lots.  The complainant applied for a residential plot of area 356 Sq. Yds. in ‘General Category’ vide his application No.85014 dated 07.09.2011, for which the earnest money of Rs.6,05,000/- was got financed by the complainant from Punjab National Bank i.e. from the opposite party on interest @ 10.75% p.a. paying Rs.33,268/- as interest of first  6 months, from the date of  finance. Draw of lots was held on 04.11.2011 i.e. within two months from the date of  his application. He remained unsuccessful to get the plot. Now it is the case of the complainant that he was charged Rs.33,268/- for a period of 6 months; whereas the interest amount, for the period from 7.9.2011 to 4.11.2011 comes to only Rs.10,378/-.Therefore  he has been charged excess amount of Rs.22,890/-(33268-10378). That he went to the opposite party to demand the refund of that excess amount, but he was not heard; hence this complaint, for a direction to the  opposite party for refund of Rs.22,890/-, with up to date interest, besides damages for his harassment, mental tension etc. and for litigation expenses.

2.       Simple case of the opposite party in its reply   is that complainant had executed all the necessary documents, as per bank circular No.38/2010, for availing the loan, to pay earnest money for allotment of residential plot. The bank financed Rs.6,05,000/- for earnest money, for allotment of residential plot to the complainant, for which he bank charged Rs.33,268/- interest of six months which  was non- refundable. In this regard the opposite party had made vide  publication and also circulated the pamphlets of the bank circular  specifically mentioning that amount of interest of 6 months is non- refundable. That the complainant is bound by the terms and conditions of the scheme and so is not entitled for the refund demanded. It is further pleaded that the bank, had remitted the financed amount to Branch Office,  Civil Line,  Jalandhar, for credit to the account of Jalandhar Improvement Trust on 7.9.2011 and the bank had received last refund  of unsuccessful amount on 7.4.2012. Since the amount of interest of 6 months charged was  non- refundable, therefore bank is not liable to refund the amount of interest for remaining period.

3.       Various  preliminary objections are also taken i.e. want of locus standi of  the complainant to file the complaint; want of cause of action; estoppal against him; suppression of true and material facts and want of jurisdiction to this forum.

4.       In order to prove his case, the  complainant has simply placed on record Annexure C-1 Pamphlet of “Jalandhar Improvement Trust” inviting applications for allotment of residential plots of different categories with different allotment money. The booking opened on 8.8.2011 and  was to be closed on 7.9.2011; Annexure C-2 copy of receipt issued by Jalandhar Improvement Trust, for having received  application of the complainant for 356 Sq.Yards  plot,  with earnest money of Rs.6,05,000/-; Annexure C-3 copy of draw result slip, mentioning that complainant was unsuccessfully in allotment of the plots and  Annexure CW1/A his  own supporting affidavit of the complainant.

5.       In reply thereto, opposite party has placed on record various documents  from Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-9, including copy of its circular No. 38/2010; copy of loan application of the complainant; copy of demand pronote issued by the bank; copy of authority letter of the complainant; copy of loan agreement; copy of account ledger inquiry etc.

6.       We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard ld. Counsel for the parties. We are of the considered opinion that there is absolutely no merit in this complaint and so it deserves dismissal.

7.       Bare perusal of Annexure-1 of loan scheme Ex.R-1, shows that 6 months interest on loan amount was non-refundable. The complainant had applied and received loan under this loan scheme of the opposite party, so he is bound by the terms and conditions of the  circular, specifically mentioning that said amount was non refundable. There is also  no rule or regulation or anything else  in favour of the complainant, entitling  the refund of  interest beyond the period of draw, if the draw was prior to six months of getting the application. The complainant is also  estopped to file this complaint by his own act and conduct as he very well knew the scheme, he had applied and received the loan.

8.       Ld. Counsel for the complainant hashowever  contended that State Bank of India,  in certain cases, has refunded the interest amount, for the period subsequent to draw of plots, and so Punjab National Bank should also refund the interest of that period. The contention is not supported by any evidence. Even otherwise, opposite party-bank, is not bound by the practice of any other bank. Parties to the complaint are bound by their written contract. The complainant had applied  and received  loan under said scheme Ex.R-1, agreeing that 6 months interest on loan amount  was  non-refundable.

9.       The complainant has thus totally and miserably failed to prove any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. Therefore this  complaint is hereby dismissed, but with no order as to costs. 

Announced.                                                          

Dated:07.05.2015