Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

117/2009

Mr.Murugan - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, BHW Home Finance Ltd., & another - Opp.Party(s)

R.Dhanalakshmi

14 Jun 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 27.01.2009

                                                                          Date of Order : 14.06.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                : MEMBER-I

 

C.C. No.117 /2009

DATED THIS THURSDAY THE 14^th DAY OF JUNE 2018

                                 

Mr. Murugan,

S/o. Mr. K. Shanmugam,

No.13/B, First Street,

Periyar Nagar,

Adambakkam,

Chennai – 600 088.                                                     .. Complainant.                                                

 

                                                                                  ..Versus..

 

1. The Branch Manager,

BHW HOME FINANCE LTD.,

No.443, Guna Complex,

Ground Floor, Anna Salai,

Teynampet,

Chennai – 600 018.

 

2. Mr. Shankar,

South India Consultancy,  

1^st Floor, Plaxa Center,

No.129, Catherial Garden Road,

Chennai – 600 006.                                               ..  Opposite parties.

(Given up in the complaint on 19.01.2010)

                                                  

Counsel for complainant          :  Ms. R. Dhanalakshmi

Counsel for 1^st opposite party :  Mr. M. Mohammed Ismail

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to return all the original documents retained by the opposite party and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- which was collected by the 1^st opposite party as processing fees and to pay a sum of Rs.75,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and damages with cost of Rs.15,000/- to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

The complainant applied for a loan and was disbursed by the 1^st opposite party.  Further the complainant submits that, the 2^nd opposite  party approached the complainant and explained the service of the 1^st opposite party BHW Home Finance Limited granting House Loans to the general public.   The complainant approached the 1^st opposite party for housing loan on 06.09.2008 and paid a sum of Rs.7,500/- by way of cheque No.182630 dated:06.09.2008 to the 1^st opposite party.  The 1^st opposite party also issued loan offer letter dated:09.10.2008 intimating the sanction for a sum of Rs.13,00,000/-.  As per the direction of the 1^st opposite party, on 21.10.2008, the complainant submitted his Title Deeds and all other relevant documents including application of co-applicant, guarantor signed forms, Letter of guarantee, bank statements of the guarantor with the blank cheques.  The complainant further states that the 1^st opposite party collected blank signed forms from him, guarantor and the co-applicant.  Further the complainant submits that the 1^st opposite party sent a letter dated:31.10.2008 described as follows:

“In pursuance of our loan offer dated:09.10.2008 and the subsequent documents by you for a loan of Rs.13,00,000/-.  We are pleased to enclose herewith a cheque of Rs.13,00,000/- towards the first and final disbursement of your loan”.

But in the said letter, the 1^st opposite party has not enclosed the cheque for Rs.13,00,000/-.   Further the complainant submits that, while clarifying the non issuance of cheque, the 1^st opposite party has not properly responded.   Hence the complainant issued a letter dated:10.11.2008 to cancel the loan.  The 1^st opposite party in order to preclose the loan, claimed 2% towards charges.  The complainant also paid several amounts in different dates including preclosure charges.  Further the complainant submits that after preclosure of the loan while demanding to return the documents, the opposite party deliberately stated that there is no document to be returned.  Hence the complainant issued issue legal notice dated:26.11.2008 to the opposite parties and the 1^st opposite party sent a reply notice dated:12.12.2008 to the complainant.   Thereafter, this complaint is filed.

2.     The brief averments in the written version filed by the  1^st opposite party is as follows:

The 1^st opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same. The 1^st opposite party states that the complainant approached the 1^st opposite party for a mortgage loan and was duly sanctioned after due execution of mortgage.   Further the 1^st opposite party states that after due sanction of the loan and execution of mortgage deed, the complainant was requested to produce some documents.  Since the complainant was not able to produce the documents, the complainant himself given letter dated:10.11.2008 to cancel the loan which was duly accepted on payment of preclosure charges at the rate of 2%.   Further the 1^st opposite party states that immediately after preclosure of the loan, the opposite party returned all the documents and obtained acknowledgement and signature.  Further the 1^st opposite party states that, the claim of Rs.50,000/- towards processing fees is imaginary and only processing fees of Rs.7,500/- alone is received from the complainant and was utilised for due verification of Title Deeds etc. The claim of Rs.50,000/- for processing fees is imaginary.  Further the 1^st opposite party states that the claim of Rs.75,000/- towards compensation is imaginary.  The complainant also has not produced the documents as required by the opposite parties.  The documents were returned to the complainant immediately after preclosure of the loan.  Therefore there is no deficiency in service on the part of the 1^st opposite party and the complaint has to be dismissed.

3.   In order to prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A9 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the 1^st opposite party filed and documents Ex.B1 to Ex.B5 are filed and marked on the side of the 1^st opposite party.

4.     The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the opposite parties are liable to return the original document as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of a sum of Rs.50,000/- alleged to be collected by the 1^st opposite party towards processing fee as prayed for?
3. Whether the complainant is entitled a compensation  of Rs.75,000/- towards mental agony with cost of Rs.15,000/- as prayed for?

 

5.     On point:

The claim against the 2^nd opposite party is given up on 19.01.2010. Hence the case against the 2^nd opposite party is dismissed.  The complainant and the 1^st opposite party filed their respective written arguments.  Perused the records namely complaint, written version, proof affidavits, documents etc.  Admittedly, the complainant applied for a loan and was disbursed by the 1^st opposite party.  The contention of the complainant is that, the 2^nd opposite  party approached the complainant and explained the service of the 1^st opposite party BHW Home Finance Limited granting House Loans to the general public.   The complainant approached the 1^st opposite party for housing loan on 06.09.2008 and paid a sum of Rs.7,500/- by way of cheque No.182630 dated:06.09.2008 to the 1^st opposite party as per Ex.A3.  The 1^st opposite party also issued loan offer letter dated:09.10.2008 intimating the sanction for a sum of Rs.13,00,000/- vide Ex.A1.  As per the direction of the 1^st opposite party, on 21.10.2008, the complainant submitted his Title Deeds and all other relevant documents including application of co-applicant, guarantor signed forms, Letter of guarantee, bank statements of the guarantor with the blank cheques; is not denied.  The complainant further contended that the 1^st opposite party collected blank signed forms from him, guarantor and the co-applicant.  Further the contention of the complainant is that the 1^st opposite party sent a letter dated:31.10.2008 vide Ex.A2 which reads as follows:

“In pursuance of our loan offer dated:09.10.2008 and the subsequent documents by you for a loan of Rs.13,00,000/-.  We are pleased to enclose herewith a cheque of Rs.13,00,000/- towards the first and final disbursement of your loan”.

But in the said letter, the 1^st opposite party has not enclosed the alleged cheque for Rs.13,00,000/-.   Further the contention of the complainant is that, while clarifying the non issuance of cheque, the 1^st opposite party has not properly responded.   Hence the complainant issued a letter dated:10.11.2008 to cancel the loan vide Ex.A5 the 1^st opposite party in order to preclose the loan, claimed 2% towards charges.  The complainant also paid several amounts in different dates including preclosure charges as per Ex.A6.  Further the contention of the complainant is that after preclosure of the loan while demanding to return the documents, the opposite party deliberately stated that no document to be returned. All the documents were returned to the complainant immediately after the foreclosure.   The complainant also has not produced the documents as required by the opposite parties. Hence the complainant was constrained to issue legal notice as per Ex.A8 and thereafter, filed this case for return of documents, compensation etc. 

6.     The contention of the 1^st opposite party is that the complainant approached the 1^st opposite party for a mortgage loan and was duly sanctioned after due execution of mortgage.  But the 1^st opposite party’s name itself is styled as M/s.BHW  Home Finance proves that the opposite parties shall be liable to grant only housing loan for House property purposes.   As per the Reserve Bank of India rules, the housing loan are exempted from preclosure charges.  Further the contention of the 1^st opposite party is that after due sanction of the loan and execution of mortgage deed, the complainant was requested to produce some documents.  Since the complainant was not able to produce the documents, the complainant himself given letter dated:10.11.2008 to cancel the loan which was duly accepted on payment of preclosure charges at the rate of 2% which is against the Reserve Bank of India rules.   Further the contention of the 1^st opposite party is that immediately after preclosure of the loan, the opposite party returned all the documents and obtained acknowledgement and signature as per Ex.B2 which was not objected by the complainant in this case before the Forum.  Moreover, the complainant himself admitted in his written arguments in para No.8, which reads as follows:-

“After all the amounts paid by me, the 1^st opposite party returned the Title Deed with 4 in Nos. blank cheques on 13.11.2008”.

7.     Further the contention of the 1^st opposite party is that, the claim of Rs.50,000/- towards processing fees is imaginary.  Only processing fees of Rs.7,500/- alone is received from the complainant and was utilised for due verification of Title Deeds etc.  The receipts produced by the complainant is related to the payment made and not for processing.  Further the contention of the 1^st opposite party is that the claim of Rs.75,000/- towards compensation is imaginary.  All the documents were returned to the complainant immediately after  preclosure of the loan.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the complainant has not proved any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  Hence the complaint has to be dismissed. 

In the result, this complaint is dismissed.  No costs.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 14^th day of June 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1	09.10.2008	Copy of loan offer letter
Ex.A2	31.10.2008	Copy of sanction letter by the 1st opposite party
Ex.A3	31.10.2008	Copy of receipt for Rs.7,700/- by the 1st opposite party
Ex.A4	31.10.2008	Copy of the cheque for Rs.3,471/-
Ex.A5	10.11.2008	Copy of the requisition letter by the complainant
Ex.A6	13.11.2008	Copy of receipt of a sum of Rs.28,000/- by the 1st opposite party
Ex.A7	13.11.2008	Copy of receipt of a sum of Rs.562/-
Ex.A8	26.11.2008	Copy of legal notice by the complainant to the opposite parties
Ex.A9	12.12.2008	Copy of reply legal notice by the 1st opposite party to the complainant

 

1^ST OPPOSITE  PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:  

Ex.B1	09.10.2008	Copy of loan offer letter
Ex.B2	13.11.2008	Copy of received list of documents
Ex.B3		Copy of cheque cancelled
Ex.B4	12.12.2008	Copy of legal notice with Acknowledgement due
Ex.B5	10.11.2008	Copy of request letter by the complainant

 

 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT