Haryana

Ambala

CC/287/2021

Jaspal Singh Bhola - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shubham Housing Development Finace Co Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Aadesh Verma

21 Oct 2022

ORDER

 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

 

                                                          Complaint case no.         :     287 of 2021

                                                          Date of Institution           :     14.09.2021.

                                                          Date of decision    :     21.10.2022.

 

1. Jaspal Singh Bhola S/o Sh. Ranjit Singh, aged 65 years, (UID No.8153-9902-7870)
2. Jaswinder Kaur W/o Sh. Jaspal Singh Bhola, aged 59 years

Both R/o H.No.151, Near New Masjid, Village & P.O.- Pilkhani, Tehsil Ambala Cantt, District- Ambala

          ……. Complainants.

                                                Versus

1. Shubham Housing Development Finance Co. Ltd., through its Managing Director, Shubham House, 425, Udhyog Vihar Phase-IV. Gurugram-122015;

E Mail- customercare@shubham.co

2. Shubham Housing Development Finance Co. Ltd., through its Branch Manager, Plot No.102, 2nd Floor, Prem Nagar, Ambala City-134003

                                                                                   ….…. Opposite Parties

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member,

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.

 

Present:       Shri Aadesh Verma, Advocate, counsel for the complainants

                     OPs already ex parte.

 

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

1.                Complainants have filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

a) To release the balance loan amount of Rs.90,000/- and to refund the amount charged in excess.

b) To pay Rs.10,000/- as  compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant.

c) To pay  Rs.15,000/- as cost of Litigation.

OR

Grant any other relief, which this Hon'ble Commission deems fit and proper as per the facts and circumstances of this case

2.            Brief facts of the case are that the representative of the OPs approached the complainants for giving home loan for repair & renovation of their house in Village- Pilkhani. They were assured by the OPs that the loan of Rs.2,05,000/- will be sanctioned with payable interest @ 9.50% P.A., which was to be repaid in 120 Months. The complainants submitted all necessary documents which were demanded by the OPs for obtaining the said loan.  Thereafter, the OPs sanctioned the House Improvement Loan of Rs.2,05,000/- on 31.08.2018 vide application No.APPL05041221 vide Loan Account No. OAMB1810000005015279 but surprisingly, in place of releasing full sanctioned loan amount, OP No.2 released only an amount of Rs.1,32,004/-. Thereafter, OP No.2 disbursed an amount of Rs.1,09,493/- on 26.10.2018 and illegally retained the loan amount with them. The OPs further retained/deducted an amount of Rs.23000/- + Rs.3320/- + Rs.8000/- against various formalities totalling to Rs.34,320/- before releasing the sanctioned loan amount which was Rs.2,05,004/-. The complainant visited the office of the OP No.2 after 3 months regularly and made humble request for the release of remaining balance loan amount of Rs.90,000/- but to no avail. The OPs also illegally started charging the interest first @ 17% P.A. now they are charging @ 22%. The complainants are regularly paying the EMIs but due to COVID-19 pandemic the complainants approached the OP No.2 with the request either to disburse remaining loan amount or reduce the EMIs on the disbursed amount of Rs.1,09,493/- and to charge interest @ 9.50% only, as assured/promised at the time of filing application for loan and further requested to refund the extra charges taken from the complainant at the time of applying for loan but to no avail. The complainants submitted a written representation dated 23.04.2021 to the OPs for correction of loan amount but to no avail.  The OPs are bound to charge processing fee only on the released loan amount of Rs.1,32,004/- and not for Rs.2,05,000/-. The complainants served legal notice dated 05.07.2021 upon the OPs in the matter, but to no avail.  The OPs retained some of the blank papers with the signature of complainant no.2 which they might have used as per their own choice without informing the complainants. Hence this complaint.
3.           Upon notice, none appeared on behalf of the OPs, before this Commission, therefore, they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 08.12.2021.
4.           Learned counsel for the complainants tendered affidavit of the complainants as Annexure C-W1/A and C-W1/B alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 to C-13 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainants.
5.           We have heard the learned counsel for complainants and carefully gone through the case file.
6.           Learned counsel for the complainants submitted that by not releasing the entire loan amount and also at the same time, levying huge rate of interest @22% p.a. on the partial loan amount released in favour of the complainants, the OPs are thus deficient in providing service. 
7.           It may be stated here that though the complainants in their complaint have stated that the OPs are illegally charging rate of interest @22% p.a. on the partial loan amount, yet, when we go through the loan sanction letter dated 31.08.2018, Annexure C-1, it reveals that it has been clearly mentioned against the column Variable Interest rate as applicable on date of sanction is 22% p.a. Thus, in this view of the matter, plea taken by the complainants in their complaint that the OPs are illegally charging rate of interest @22% p.a. on the partial loan amount being devoid of merit is rejected.
8.           As far as plea taken by the complainants to the effect that the OPs did not release the entire sanctioned amount of Rs.2,05,000/- and on the other hand released only an amount of Rs.1,32,004/-, it may be stated here that it is not the case of the complainants that the OPs are charging interest on Rs.2,05,000/- instead of on Rs.1,32,004/-. It is significant to mention here that in the letter dated 23.04.2021, Annexure C-2, having been sent to the OPs, the complainant No.2 has stated that it was told by the OPs that the remaining amount will be released after completion of the renovation work of their property for which loan was obtained. It is further evident from the contents of this letter, that the complainants themselves have requested the OPs that their loan be treated as to be obtained to the tune of Rs.1,32,004/- only. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that when the complainants themselves told to the OPs that their loan amount be restricted to Rs.1,32,004/- only, then, they have no reason to blame the OPs.  
9.           In view of peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, it is held that because the complainants have failed to prove their case, resultantly, this complaint stands dismissed with no order as to cost. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties concerned as per rules.  File be annexed and consigned to the record room.

Announced on: 21.10.2022.

 

 

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)  (Ruby Sharma)               (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                         Member                       President