BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.324 of 2014

Date of Instt. 15.09.2014

Date of Decision :05.03.2015

1. Amit Kumar Passi son of Ram Murti Passi;

2. Mrs.Sudarshan Pass wife of Ram Murti Pass;

Both resident of EM-41, Phagwara Gate, Near Dr.Anil Jyoti, Jalandhar.

..........Complainants

Versus

1. Standard Chartered Bank, 23-25, MG Road, Fort, Mumbai through its Managing Director.

2. Standard Chartered Bank, Plot No.34, Near Delta Chamber, Jalandhar through its Branch Manager.

3. Standard Chartered Bank, Customer Care Unit, 19, Rajaji Salai, Chennai.

.........Opposite parties

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: S. Jaspal Singh Bhatia (President)

Ms. Jyotsna Thatai (Member)

Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Sh.Vivek Kapoor Adv., counsel for complainants.

Sh.APS Pathania Adv., counsel for opposite parties.

Order

J.S Bhatia (President)

1. The complainants have filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, against the opposite parties on the averments that the complainants have availed the home loan in a sum of Rs.13,60,000/- from the opposite parties, sanctioned on 25.5.2005. Repayable in 240 installments of Rs.10,957/- each, having a variable rate of interest. The opposite parties had undertaken to intimate the complainants about the fluctuations in the rate of interest as per the intimation received from the Reserve Bank of India. At the time of the advancement of the loan the rate of interest was 7.50% per annum. The complainants had come to know that opposite parties had been charging higher rate of interest than the rate of interest prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India but the opposite parties failed to inform the complainants about the same. Accordingly the complainants approached this Forum through complaint brought under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The said complaint was disposed off by Sh.D.R.Arora vide order 31.3.2011. However thereafter an execution was also filed but the opposite parties have failed to comply with the orders. Subsequently the complainants approached the opposite parties to close the loan account and to get the balance taken over by PNB Bank. The opposite parties have issued a loan foreclosure for an amount of Rs.1290513.69/- and an amount of Rs.1279782.61/- was considered as outstanding principal amount and remaining amount of Rs.10731.08/- was considered as interest for the month. It was an account known as home saver. As per this amount the opposite parties were to charge the interest on the used amount from the account. The complainant was having faith on the opposite parties and used to pay the amount. The complainants enquired the matter about the account. The complainants were stunned after noticing many facts. The complainants got the withdrawal detail as well as the interest charged on the amount and noticed the fact that an amount of Rs.300364.56/- was withdrawn from the account and also opposite parties have claimed the interest on this amount. The complainants want refund of this amount alongwith interest from the opposite parties. The complainant has asked for the clarification regarding the withdrawal and usage of this amount but the opposite parties have failed to give the satisfactory reply. The loan was taken for an amount of Rs.13,60,000/- and till now Rs.15,06,814.97/- has been paid. Inspite of this fact, the opposite parties raised again an amount of Rs.12,90,513.69/- without any basis. The excess amount is also to be refunded. On such like averments, the complainants have prayed for directing the opposite parties to refund them Rs.300364.56/- alongwith interest and to return the title documents alongwith NOC. They have further prayed for directing the opposite parties to adjust the rate of interest and return excess amount to them. They have also claimed compensation.

2. Upon notice, opposite parties did not appear and as such they were proceeded against exparte.

3. In support of their complaint, learned counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavits Ex.C1 and Ex.C2 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C41 and closed evidence.

4. We have carefully gone through the record and also heard the learned counsel for the complainant and further gone through the written arguments submitted on behalf of complainant.

5. Counsel for the complainant contended that complainants have availed home loan in the sum of Rs.13,60,000/- from the opposite parties which was sanctioned on 25.5.2005 and now opposite parties have taken the plea that in fact there are two accounts i.e one home saver account and second is loan account but the opposite parties have not given number of second account, if any. He further contended that no statement was received regarding the second account. He further contended that complainant is not aware about any second account and used to use only one account and further used to withdraw and the deposit amount in the same account and opposite parties also used to withdraw EMI from that account. He further contended that statements of account sent by the opposite parties are showing sufficient balance in the home saver account. He further contended that opposite parties have charged interest on the withdrawal amount shown in the statement of account and how interest can be charged. He further contended that instructions were given to withdraw only EMI and other withdrawals from the account of the complainants are without their consent and illegal and complainants are entitled to refund of the same alongwith interest. We have carefully considered the contentions advanced by learned counsel for the complainants. Ex.C5 is statement of account. In this statement interest amount, EMI amount, withdrawal etc are mentioned. The version of the complainants is that the amounts shown in withdrawal column are without their consent and the total amount is liable to be refunded. In order to clarify the matter, the official of opposite party bank was summoned as a witness and Sh.Akhil Kumar, Customer Service Executive appeared on behalf of bank and made a statement on 12.2.2015 to the effect that he has seen statement of account Ex.C5 and the complainant was having one home saver account and second loan account. He has further stated that the amount shown in column of withdrawal from home saver account was transfered to loan account of the complainant and amounts shown in statement of account Ex.C5 were withdrawn as there were insufficient fund in the loan account of the complainant. He has further stated that amount of Rs.3,00,364.56/- shown in statement of account in the end is on account of interest. He has further stated that in case, balance is less in loan account of the complainant than the amount of EMI then the difference of amount is withdrawn from the home saver account. He further stated that at the time of opening of the account, home saver and loan account were opened at the same time. He further stated that amount deposited by the complainant in home saver account, if is in excess then the interest is proportionately decreased in the loan account. The controversy involved in the present complaint can not be effectively decided in the present summary proceedings. The loan was taken in the year 2005. The complainants have also prayed for directing the opposite parties to adjust the rate of interest and return excess amount to them besides return of amount of Rs.300364.56/- shown as withdrawal in the statement of account Ex.C5. The dispute between the parties is in substance of settlement of account for which the appropriate Forum is Civil Court. In the present summary proceedings, it can not be determined, if any excess amount on account of interest, has been charged by the opposite party bank and if so to what extent. For deciding the controversy involved in the present complaint, the entire entries in the statement of account right from the year 2005 when the home loan was taken will have to be scrutinized which is not practicable in the present summary proceedings. For deciding controversy involved in the present complaint, detailed evidence and inquiry is required. So complainant is relegated to Civil Court for reddressal of his grievance.

6. In view of above discussion, the present complaint is dismissed with no order as to cost and complainant is relegated to Civil Court for reddressal of his grievance. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Jyotsna Thatai Jaspal Singh Bhatia

05.03.2015 Member Member President