Kerala

Thiruvananthapuram

CC/400/2021

Sijo John Thoppil - Complainant(s)

Versus

SBI - Opp.Party(s)

06 Jun 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

 

   SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN             : PRESIDENT

SMT.PREETHA.G.NAIR          : MEMBER

SRI.VIJU.V.R                         : MEMBER

 

CC.NO.400/21 (Filed on : 23/12/2021)

ORDER DATED : 06/06/2022

COMPLAINANT

 

Sijo John Thoppil,

S/o.T.M.Yohannan, TC.8/271,

Rose Villa, Puthenkada,

Thirumala.P.O, Thiruvananthapuram – 695032

Rep.by his Power of Attorney Holder

T.M.Yohannan

TC.8/271, Rose Villa, Puthenkada,

Thirumala.P.O, Thiruvananthapuram – 695032

 

(By Adv.Ravikrishnan.N.R)

                                                     VS

OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

1. State Bank of India,

Vellayambalam Branch,

Sasthamangalam Road,

Thiruvananthapuram – 695010

Rep.by its Manager

 

2. State Bank of India,

Stress Assests and Recovery Branch,

LMS Compound, Opp.Museum West Gate,

Vikas Bhavan.P.O

•  

Rep.by its Manager

1.  

                                            ORDER

SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN                : PRESIDENT

1. This complaint is filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 and stood over to this date for consideration and this Commission passed the following order.

2.  This is a complaint filed by the complainant against the opposite parties alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. After admitting the complaint notice was issued to the opposite parties. After accepting the notice from this commission both the opposite parties failed to appear before this commission as directed. Hence on 03/03/2022 the opposite parties were called absent and set exparte.

3. The case of the complainant in short is that the complainant is a person working abroad and earning his livelihood. He has availed two loans from the first opposite party bank for construction of a residential building, one a home loan bearing account number as HL A/c No.67115174618 for an amount of Rs.23,00,000/- (Rupees twenty three lakhs only) with a repayment period of twenty years and the other named home plus loan having bearing account number as 6753914671 for an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only). An amount of Rs.56,000/- (Rupees fifty six thousand only) was utilized for compulsory insurance of the property by the first opposite party bank. Repayments were made by the complainant and a total amount of Rs.35,00,000/- (Rupees thirty five lakhs only) were paid by the complainant till 2021 towards the repayment of the loans. As the interest rate was very high, the complainant enquired with the bank whether they can reduce the interest rate.  Then the officials concerned informed the complainant to close the entire dues payable to the bank and thus the entire dues were paid by the complainant. As the entire balance EMIs with interest was paid by the complainant as per the directions / intimations given by the bank officials, the opposite parties reduced the interest rate of the home loan account and intimated the same to the complainant about the reduction in the interest rate. The officials concerned also intimated the complainant that the interest rate of the Home Plus Loan cannot be reduced. This intimation was given to the complainant on 2^nd November 2019.  The complainant used to make the repayment whenever he was required to pay by the opposite party’s officials through various types communications. Before 19^th October 2019 the complainant cleared all the dues of the EMIs with interest and informed the matter to the opposite parties. Along with the same he requested to send the required documents to his e-mail and gave the email ID to the opposite parties.  On 4^th March 2020, the complainant was intimated by the opposite parties that the balance amount outstanding in the loan accounts of the complainant was Rs.6, 50,000/- (Rupees six lakhs fifty thousand only) and hence the accounts were made Non Performing Assets (NPA). They also intimated that the complainant should remit that amount immediately to avoid recovery actions. But the complainant was shocked to hear this as he was not having any dues pending and he was not able to understand how such a huge balance which was not intimated to him till date suddenly appeared as balance outstanding. So the complainant requested the complainants to give a detailed statement regarding his loan account so that he could understand how such a huge amount appeared as balance outstanding amount. But the opposite pa.rties was not at all ready to provide with the correct statement regarding the two loan accounts to the complainant. The complainant understood that the opposite parties are making false claims against the complainant for making unlawful enrichment and they have falsely calculated such a big amount without giving any prior intimation till that date. He also was sure about the fact had there by any such dues as claimed by the opposite parties, they could not have reduced the interest rate which is done only it there are no dues at all regarding the EMI as well as the interest towards the loan. As the second opposite party continued with the recovery proceedings based upon a false statement calculating a huge amount which appeared all on a sudden, the complainant was forced to approach the Hon’ble High Court and the Hon’ble High Court has granted interim stay of fifteen day without going into the merits of the matter. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) as per the order of the High Court on 29/10/2021 even if the opposite parties did not disclose how they calculated such a huge amount. The opposite parties are guilty of deficiency by concealing the account statement from the customer / complainant which the complainant is legally entitled to get. It is clear from the acts of the opposite parties in not providing with the account statement despite repeated requests from the complainant, that there is foul play on part of the opposite parties with a malafide intention to snatch the assets of the complainant. The deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties has caused financial and mental agony to the complainant and he is put to rush to different authorities to protect his assets from the false demands made by the opposite parties in connection with his loans. In the said circumstances the complainant has no other way except to approach this Hon’ble commission and hence this complaint.      

4.  The evidence in this case consists of PW1 and Exts.A1 to A3 from the side of the complainant. The opposite parties being declared exparte, there is no oral or documentary evidence from the side of the opposite parties.

5. The issues to be considered in this case

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief claimed in the complaint.
3. Order as to cost.

5. Heard. Perused records, affidavit and documents. To substantiate the case of the complainant, the complainant himself sworn an affidavit as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A3 were produced and marked. Ext.A1 is the screen shot showing the communication with the opposite party bank. Ext.A2 series is the copy of the e-mails issued to the opposite parties requesting for the account statement. Ext.A3 is the copy of the notice issued by the second opposite party intimating recovery proceedings. The main grievance of the complainant is that exorbitant amount was shown as due form him to the bank without providing any details with regard to the due amount. The case of the complainant is that inspite of demanding and requesting for the detailed account statement in respect of the two loans obtained by the complainant from the opposite party’s bank, the bank failed to furnish the account statement and the same itself is a deficiency in service as a customer is entitled for an account statement relating to his loan account. The complainant claims that he was given reduction of rate of interest by the opposite parties in respect of one loan. According to the complainant if there was any due, bank could not for reduce the interest rate. As the opposite parties not appeared before this commission to defend the claim made by the complainant by adducing any evidence, the evidence adduced by the complainant stands unchallenged. There is no evidence from the side of the opposite parties to discredit the evidence adduced by the complainant. According to the complainant he has paid a total amount of Rs.35,00,000/- (Rupees thirty five lakhs only) to the opposite party till 2021. Apart from that as per the direction of the Hon’ble High Court the complainant has paid Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakhs only) on 29/10/2021 as per the conditional stay order passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala. In the absence of any contra evidence from the side of opposite parties, we accept the evidence adduced by the complainant. By swearing an affidavit as PW1 and marking Exts.A1 to A3 documents, we find that the complainant has succeeded in establishing his case against the opposite parties. From the available evidence before this Commission, we find that there is deficiency in service from the side of opposite parties in not providing the account statement to the complainant. We also find that the complainant has suffered financial loss as well as mental agony due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. In the above discussions, we find that this a fit case to be allowed in favour of the of the complainant.    

             In the result, complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to pay Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) as compensation to the complainant, along with Rs.2500/-(Rupees two thousand and five hundred only) as cost of this proceedings within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the amount except cost shall carry an interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order till the date of realization / remittance.                                                                                       

                A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

        Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission, this the 6^th day of June 2022.

 

                                                                                                    Sd/-

P.V.JAYARAJAN    : PRESIDENT

 

                                                                                            Sd/- 

        PREETHA G NAIR      : MEMBER

 

                                                                                             Sd/-

                          VIJU.V.R        : MEMBER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

be/

APPENDIX

CC.NO.400/2021

List of witness for the complainant

PW1                      - Sijo John Thoppil

List of Exhibits for the complainant

Ext                        Copy of screen short showing the communication with the opposite party bank.

Ext.A2 series         copy of the e-mails issued to the opposite parties requesting the account statement.

 Ext.A3                 copy of the notice issued by the second opposite party intimating recovery proceedings.

List of witness for the opposite parties – NIL

List of Exhibits for the opposite parties – NIL

Court Exhibits                                     - NIL

 

 

                                                                                        Sd/-

                                                                                 PRESIDENT