Haryana

Karnal

CC/259/2020

Amarjeet Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

Punjab National Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Pourushi Mehta

29 Jan 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                      Complaint No. 259 of 2020

                                                      Date of instt.24.07.2020

                                                      Date of Decision:29.01.2024

 

Amarjeet Kaur aged about 70 years wife of Shri Manmohan Singh, resident of house no.246-B, Model Town, Karnal (Aadhar no.4860 5932 3837)

 

                                               …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1. Punjab National Bank having its Regional office at Sector-12, Karnal through its Regional Manager.
2. Punjab Nation al Bank, Sector -5, HUDA Urban Estate, Kurukshetra.

…..Opposite Parties.

       

Complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Shri Jaswant Singh……President.

              Shri Vineet Kaushik…….Member

              Dr. Suman Singh……Member

 

Argued by:  Shri Satish Arora, counsel for the complainant.

                    Shri Vikram Sharma, counsel for the OPs.

 

                    (Jaswant Singh, President)

ORDER:                     

          

                 The complainant has filed the present complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant has applied for a EWS flat with the Housing Board, Haryana at Karnal through OP, vide her application no.3285. The complainant deposited the earnest money of Rs.1,09,000/- with the Housing Board Haryana by taking loan under the scheme of Earnest Money Deposit Scheme on dated 24.03.2015. In the draw held by the Housing Board Haryana, the complainant became successful candidate for the EWS flat. On 09.02.2017, OP directed the complainant to deposit above said earnest money amount with  interest till date and if the complainant is interested to surrender the same then she can surrender the same by moving an application to the bank after depositing the interest amount on earnest money. The complainant was not interested to keep the said flat hence she on 18.04.2017 as per direction of OP, deposited an amount of Rs.25819/-as interest on the aforesaid amount. The concerned official asked the complainant that the matter is in between bank and housing board Haryana and complainant has nothing to do with the said loan account because the earnest money has been deposited by the bank itself to the Housing Board. The complainant wants to take loan from some bank at Karnal, the said banker asked her to get No Dues Certificate from PNB Kurukshetra regarding aforesaid loan. Complainant requested the OP no.2 for issuing the NOC but OP refused to give the same by saying that the loan account is still intact and has not been closed as the Housing Board has not refunded the earnest money to the bank. Then complainant requested the OP no.2 that since it is the bank who paid the earnest money to Housing Board directly hence it is the duty of the bank to get the said amount refunded from Housing Board because as per direction of the bank complainant had already deposited the entire interest amount in the bank and surrendered her flat but OPs did not bother to get the refund of the same and refused to issue the NOC to the complainant. Then complainant sent a legal notice dated 17.02.2020 to the OPs but it also did not yield any result. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

2.             On notice, OP no.1 appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action and mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties. On merits, it is pleaded that complainant has applied for the loan for EWS flat with Housing Board Haryana situated at Karnal, accordingly the earnest money was deposited with the Housing Board. OP no.2 had written a letter to the complainant only for the demand of interest, which was due to be served by the complainant to the OPs. The allegation regarding surrender of the flat, it could have been possible by applying to the Housing Board in which OP has no role to play. It is further pleaded that complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.25819/- in the said loan account and a sum of Rs.137990.60/- is still outstanding in the said loan account. So far as the allegation leveled by the complainant with regard to the matter is left between the bank and the Housing Board is wrong and denied. Until and unless the amount stands due in the loan account, the question of issuing of no dues certificate will not arise at all. It is further pleaded that the bank has paid the earnest money to the Housing Board at the request and instructions of the complainant only that to being the loan advanced to him as per the policy of the bank. As per the policy of the Housing Board only the earnest money deposited by the unsuccessful applicants is to be refunded back whereas the amount of successful bidders is deposited/adjusted towards the 25% of the purchase money of the said flats, like the alleged money might had been deposited in the said account only. The question of refund of that money does not arise at all. It is further pleaded that OP no.2 who has performed its/his part of contract incumbent upon him by transferring the earnest money amount to the housing board as per the terms of the agreement executed by the complainant at the time of availing of the loan in question. Thereafter, it is privity of contract left between the complainant and the Housing Board as the obligation on the part of the OP no.2 was performed by transferring the amount to the Housing Board. Since the amount in question is still lying with the Housing Board and still outstanding in the account of the OPs so the issuance of no dues certificate at the part of the OPs does not arise at all. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Complainant has tendered into evidence her affidavit Ex.CW1/A, copy of application form Ex.C1, acknowledgement slip Ex.C2, copy of letter dated 09.02.2017 issued by bank Ex.C3, copy of account statement Ex.C4, copy of legal notice Ex.C5, postal receipt Ex.C6, reply to legal notice Ex.C7 and closed the evidence on 14.11.2022 by suffering separate statement.

5.             In additional evidence, learned counsel for the complainant has tendered copy of RTI reply of application Ex.C8, copy of letter written to PNB Ex.C9, copy of application form Ex.C10 and closed the additional evidence on 30.10.2023 by suffering separate statement.

6.             Learned counsel for the OPs has tendered into evidence affidavit of Neha Rani Branch Manager Ex.OPW/A, copy of loan agreement Ex.OP1, copy of statement of account Ex.OP2 and closed the evidence on 07.04.2023 by suffering separate statement.

7.             We have heard the learned counsel of the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

8.             Learned counsel for complainant, while reiterating the contents of complaint, has vehemently argued that complainant has applied for a EWS flat with the Housing Board, Haryana at Karnal through OP. The complainant got deposited the earnest money of Rs.1,09,000/- with the Housing Board Haryana by taking loan from the OPs under the scheme of Earnest Money Deposit Scheme  dated 24.03.2015. The complainant became successful candidate for the EWS flat. On 09.02.2017, OP wrote a letter to complainant for deposition of the above said amount with interest and if he is interested to surrender the same then she can surrender the same by moving an application to the bank after depositing the interest amount on earnest money. On 18.04.2017 as per direction of OP, complainant deposited an amount of Rs.25819/-as interest on the aforesaid amount. Complainant applied for loan from another bank and for that purpose, complainant requested the OP no.2 for issuing the No dues certificate but OP refused to give the same by saying that the Housing Board has not refunded the earnest money whereas the bank paid the earnest money to Housing Board directly hence it is the duty of the bank to get the said amount refunded from Housing Board and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

9.             Per contra, learned counsel for the OPs, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that complainant has applied for the loan for EWS flat with Housing Board Haryana. The earnest money amount was deposited with the Housing Board by the OPs. The complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.25819/- in the said loan account and a sum of Rs.137990/- is still outstanding in the said loan account. Until and unless the amount stands due in the loan account, the question of issuing of no dues certificate will not arise at all. The bank has paid the earnest money to the Housing Board at the request and instructions of the complainant. As per the policy of the Housing Board only the earnest money deposited by the unsuccessful applicants is to be refunded back whereas the amount of successful bidders is deposited/adjusted towards the 25% of the purchase money of the said flats. It is privity of contract left between the complainant and the Housing Board. Since the amount in question is still lying with the Housing Board and still outstanding in the account of the OPs so the issuance of no dues certificate by the OPs does not arise at all. He further argued that complainant has failed to implead the Housing Board, Haryana as a party to the present complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

10.           We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

11.           Before going into the merits of the complaint, firstly we decide, whether the present complaint is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties, or not?

12.           The complainant has alleged that for the purpose of applying EWS flat, she has applied for loan of Rs.1,09,000/- from the OPs bank. The complainant became successful candidate for the EWS flat. On 09.02.2017, OP wrote a letter to complainant for deposition of the above said amount with upto date interest and on 18.04.2017, complainant deposited an amount of Rs.25,819/- as interest on the aforesaid amount. The OPs have deposited the said amount with the Housing Board, Haryana and it is the Housing Board, who has to repay the amount to the OPs and the fact that whether the amount has been refunded to the bank or not can only be clarified by the Housing Board, Haryana. Thus, the Housing Board, Haryana, is necessary and proper party in the present complaint but the complainant has not impleaded the Housing Board Haryana, as party in the present complaint. Hence, the present complaint is not maintainable being non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties. 

13.           Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, the present complaint deserves to be dismissed and same is hereby dismissed. However, the complainant is at liberty to file fresh complaint after arraying the Housing Board, Haryana as party o the same cause of action before the competent court of law, if so desired. The limitation would not be a rider in filing a fresh case before the competent Court of law. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced
Dated: 29.01.2024

  President,       

            District Consumer Disputes                          

Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

                      (Vineet Kaushik)          (Dr. Suman Singh)        

                          Member                          Member