Haryana

Ambala

CC/278/2017

Rajat Kumar Jain - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager SBP - Opp.Party(s)

Opinder Thakur

30 May 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

                                                          Complaint No.278/17.

                                                          Date of Instt.01.08.2017.

                                                          Date of Decision: 30.05.2018.

 

Rajat Kumar Jain sonof Sh.Adarsh Kumar Jain resident of House No.933, Sector 7, HUDA, Ambala City.

                                                                             ….Complainant.

                             Vs.

 

1. The Branch Manager, State Bank of Patiala, Sector 9, HUDA Branch, Ambala City.
2. The Deputy General Manager, State Bank of Patiala, The Mall, Patiala.
3. The Chief Manager, State Bank of Patiala, Consumer Care Complaint, The Mall, Patiala.

                   ….Opposite parties.

          Complaint U/s 12 of CP Act, 1986

 

 BEFORE: SH. D.N.ARORA, PRESIDENT

                   SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR,MEMBER                                                 MS.ANAMIKA GUPTA, MEMBER.       

 

Argued By: Sh.Opinder Kumar Thakur, Advocate for complainant.

                   Sh.Sunjay Dutt, Advocate for OPs.

 

ORDER

 

                   The complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite parties with the averments that he had taken loan of Rs.6 lacs to purchase a car which was to be repaid in 84 installments (Total amount Rs.7,85,700/-) of Rs.9352/- each upto 20.02.2017. The complainant paid all the installments regularly upto 20.02.2017 and after clearing the amount of loan the complainant wrote a letter for issuance of No Objection Certificate to the OPs who did not issue the same, therefore, he met OPs but he was asked to pay an amount of Rs.1,21,828/- and thereafter NOC would be issued. The OPs have not issued the NOC despite receiving all the installments. The complainant requested the Ops to issue the same and even got served legal notice upon them but of no avail. In evidence, the complainant has tendered affidavit Annexure CA and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C6.

2.                          Upon, notice OPs appeared and filed reply to the complaint wherein preliminary objection such as cause of action, locus standi and concealment of material facts etc. have been taken. The complainant has paid Rs.7,85,700/- in equal installments of Rs.9352/- each upto 20.02.2017 but the NOC has not been issued as per Hypothecation Agreement because the borrower had to repay the loan as per agreement/sanction letter which forms part of this agreement and sanctioned letter in 84 equated monthly installments of Rs.9354/- fixed for 1^st year, Rs.9960/- for 2^nd + 3^rd years and after 3^rd year the installment was to be reset each till entire loan with interest is fully repaid. This equated monthly installment included the interest which was @ 8 % fixed for 1^st year and 10 % for 2^nd year and 3^rd year and after that the interest was to be reset per annum with monthly/half yearly rests. The rate of interest was subject to revision from time to time and as per agreement para no.6 which provides that the bank shall be entitled at its sole discretion, from time to time and any time, without notice to me/us to revise, vary and change the rate and/or the rests of the interest as it may deem fit and proper and application of such revised, varied and change rate and/or rests of the interest on the outstanding loan amount shall be deemed to be sufficient notice to borrower of such revision, variation and change which shall be binding on borrower.  The complainant has not paid the total amount as per terms and conditions of agreement and sanction accepted by the complainant. Other contentions have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. In evidence, the OPs have tendered affidavit Annexure RA and documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R2.

 3.                         We have heard the complainant and have gone through the case file very carefully.

4.                          It is an admitted fact that complainant took the loan for Rs.6 lacs for purchase of car. It is also not disputed the 84 installments were fixed for repayment of loan. It is not disputed that complainant had paid the amount of Rs.7,85,700/- in equal installments of Rs.9352/- each upto 20.02.2017 as admitted by the OPs in para No.2 of reply to the complaint. The main grievance of the complainant that after payment of all installments as fixed by the OPs they had not issued the NOC to the complainant after paying the all installments. The OPs have taken the plea that as per the arrangement letter Annexure R1 and Hypothecation Agreement Annexure R2 it is mentioned in clause 6 that borrower shall repay to the bank the amount of the loan as per arrangement/sanction letter which forms part of this agreement in 84 equal monthly installments of Rs.9354/- fixed for 1^st year and Rs.9960/- for 2^nd or 3^rd year and after 3^rd installments will be rested. The rate of interest is fixed 8 % for first year and 10 % fixed for 2^nd and 3^rd year and after 3^rd year interest will be rest.  It is very strange that when the complainant paid the first year installment of Rs.9354/- how the OPs have accepted the installment on the basis of first year fixed installment for further years. It is also a strange fact that for the following years they have also accepted the same installments and have not made any reschedule of the payment as per their agreement. On the other hand the complainant has also denied the above said agreement and on the ground that a hand written clause was mentioned in the agreement afterwards by the bank without intimating the complainant no and signatures were  made on such handwritten clause. The complainant has also received the confirmation for Rs.9352/- for all 84 installments continuously through SMS. There is no such allegations that the complainant has committed default in making the payment rather the OPs have admitted that all the 84 installments have been paid by the complainant but it is not understandable as to why the OPs have not issued the NOC to the complainant and even did not place on record any document to show that the installments have been rescheduled after making three year installments and such like behavior from a financial institution, which is the backbone of the economy of our country.  The Ops have not placed any statement of account in order to show that any amount is to be recovered from the complainant.  The Ops have even not sent any notice to intimate to the complainant that any amount is outstanding against him during the making the payment of loan/installments and even not placed any such notice on the case file. The complainant has been able to prove deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs by leading cogent and reliable evidence. Therefore, we allow the present complaint against the Ops with costs which is assessed at Rs.10,000/-. The Ops are further directed not to charge any amount of Rs.1,21,828/- for issuance of NOC and they are further directed to issue the NOC of the vehicle in question after completing the formalities by the complainant. Compliance of order be made within 30 days failing which the complainant is at liberty to initiate proceedings as per CP Act. Copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

 

Announced on: 30.05.2018                                 

 

 

(ANAMIKA GUPTA)    (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)     (D.N.ARORA)     Member                          Member                        President