DATE OF FILING :21/03/16
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI
Dated this the 27th day of April 2018
Present :
SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR PRESIDENT
SRI. BENNY. K. MEMBER
CC NO. 93/16
Between
Complainant : Tomy, S/o Joseph,
Vanthuparambil House,
Kurumpalamattam Kara,
Karimannoor P.O.,
Pin – 685 581
(By Adv: K.P.Anu)
And
Opposite Party : 1 . Mahendra Rural Housing Finance Limited,
4th Floor, Mahendra Towers,
Dr.G.M. Blossa Marge,
D.K. Kurne Chowk, Warly,
Mumbai – 400 018
Represented by its General Manager.
2 . The Branch Manager,
Mahendra Rural Housing Finance Limited,
1st Floor, Yaz Complex, Market Road,
Near Nehru Park,
Muvattupuzha – 686 673.
(By Adv: A. Ajithkumar and Adv. P. K. Madhu)
O R D E R
SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR (PRESIDENT)
The case of the complainant is that,
Complainant built his house on his property with the assistance of EMS housing scheme. While he was seeking a housing loan for his completion work, the manager of Muvattupuzha of the opposite parties approached him in his residence and offered housing loan for a monthly interest of 8% on floating basis. Attracted by this offer the complainant happened to avail an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- on 29/11/12 for a duration of 120 months. The loan repayment was collected by the agent of the opposite parties directly from the
(Cont....2)
-2-
complainant. Since the each instalment which was collected by the agent were different in some months. Hence complainant requested them to issue the bank interest rate which the opposite parties is imposed in this loan in writing. But the opposite parties denied to issue the interest rate to the complainant.
On going through the statement of account issued by the opposite parties to the complainant on 15/03/16, complainant came to know that, the opposite parties granted an amount of Rs.1,56,609/- as loan. On enquiring about this, the opposite parties revealed that an amount of Rs.6609/- was an insurance premium, which is taken in the name of the complainant. But the opposite parties denied to handed over the policy certificate of the policy to the complainant. As per the annual statement dated 15/03/16, the opposite parties imposed 21.74% interest in the loan amount, instead of 8% what they promised. This act of the opposite parties in realizing a huge rate of interest from the complainant is a gross deficiency in service. More over the complainant remitted an amount of Rs.60,942/- in their loan account in total, out of this, opposite party adjusted Rs.53105/- towards interest alone. Hence the complainant is entitled to get the compensation from the opposite parties for their deficiency in service and for that purpose complainant filed this petition for directing the opposite parties to adjust the amount to the principle loan amount and also direct them to release interest @ 8% in the loan amount and also direct them to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and issue the records of insurance policy and along with Rs.5000/- as cost.
On notice opposite parties entered appearance and filed detailed reply version. In their version opposite parties contented that, no body from their office approached the complainant and offered any loan facility as alleged in the complaint. At the same time complainant himself approached them at their Muvattupuzha office and availed the loan. At that time the second opposite party clearly described the terms and condition of the loan including rate of interest to the complainant. After convincing all the facts, the complainant has availed this loan. Actual loan amount sanctioned to the complainant was Rs.156609/- and out of that amount Rs.6609/- is allocated for life insurance premium, Fire insurance premium and Broker retainer etc. The opposite parties has not concealed anything from the complainant and every documents handed over regarding the loan, and the complainant is well aware
(Cont....3)
-3-
that the rate of interest in this loan is 21.74%, and opposite parties never offered a housing loan with 8% diminishing rate of interest for the complainant. The EMI of the loan was started from 05/04/13, and EMI amount is 3213/- and the loan ends on 05/04/2023. As the complainant is a coolie worker, on his request the opposite parties engaged his agents to collect the EMI from him personally. Facts being so, there is no ground for maintaining such a complaint and the complainant is liable to be dismissed with cost of the opposite parties.
Evidence adduced by the complainant by way of documents. Ext.P1 and Ext.P2 were marked from the side of the complainant. Ext.P1 is the statement of account from 20/11/12 to 15/03/16 and Ext.P2 is the pass book. No oral or documentary evidence adduced by the opposite parties .
Heard both sides,
The point that arose for consideration is whether there is any deficiency in service from the part of opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?
The Point:- We have heard the counsel of the parties and carefully gone through the records. It is an admitted fact that the opposite parties granted a housing loan to the complainant. As per the version of the complainant he applied for 1.5 Lakh rupees for 8% interest in a diminishing rate method. But while perusing the statement, he came to know that the loan granted for him is 1,56,609 and it is for 21.74%. The learned counsel for the complainant also pointed out that the opposite parties bank received EMI from him directly and there is no fixed EMI. They realizing an exorbitant interest and it is against the prevailing banking norms. For substantiating his plea, the complainant produced 2 documents, on going through Ext.P2 loan pass book, it is seen that complainant remitted some amount in this loan till 05/10/14 and it is not as a fixed amount. Ext.P1 statement of account also shows that the remittance of EMI not in a fixed way. In facing sheet of the Ext.P2 pass book it is specifically stated that the loan amount granted to the complainant is Rs.1,56,609/-. In the first page of the Ext.P1 statement also shows that the amount sanctioned to the complainant was Rs.1,56,609/- @ 21.74% interest and fixed EMI is not stated. On further perusal of this record, it is seen that the loan is granted to
(Cont....4)
-4-
the complainant as two instalments. First instalment is of Rs.75,000/- was sanctioned on 29/11/12 and second instalment of Rs.75,000/- was sanctioned on 27/02/13. Before sanctioning the first instalment opposite parties charged Rs.4,500/- as service charges, Rs.5697/- as life insurance, Rs.612/- as fire insurance and Rs.300/- as broker retained fees. Due for first instalment was fixed on 05/12/12 as Rs.292/-. Due for second instalment was fixed on 05/01/13 as Rs.1507/-. Due for third instalment is fixed on 05/02/13 as Rs.1507/-. Due for the 4th instalment is fixed on 05/03/13 as Rs.1631/-. Then the further dues are fixed as Rs.3213/-. The irregularity in the monthly instalment is caused up to the 4th instalment was only due to the sanctioning of loan amount in two instalments. Accordingly loan repayment is fixed as 5th of every month and Rs.3213/- per month, from the 5th instalment onwards. On going through the documents we cannot find any discripencies. First EMI was calculated from the date of first instalment of loan to the next 5th day ie, from 29/11/12 to 05/12/12 ie, Rs.292/-. Second and third instalments are same. 4th EMI is calculated along with the interest of second instalment which was sanctioned on 27/02/13. Hence 4th instalment amount comes to a tune of Rs.1631/-. Further instalment are calculated for the full loan of Rs.1,56,609/- as Rs.3213/-. Ext.P1 is the loan statement from 20/11/12 to 15/03/16, ie, for 40 months. On a further perusal we can see that complainant remitted an amount of Rs.55915/- in total. The major share of the amount is adjusted as interest. Normally the finance company are doing in such a way that major EM payment in the loan account of the beginning stages are adjusted as interest.
Regarding the allegation related to the interest that offered by the complainant, complainant has not produced any document for substantiating his plea. The only documents in this matter is the loan application. Which contains all the loan details. From the side of the complainant no effort was taken, for directing the opposite parties to produce the loan application. Without having sufficient materials, we are not in a position to consider the arguments and averments in the complaint.
On the basis of the above discussion Forum is of a considered view that the complainant failed to establish deficiency in service from the part of the opposite parties with clear and cogent evidence. At the same time opposite party is directed to hand over the insurance certificate of the policy which is
(Cont....5)
-5-
admittedly taken by them in favour of the complainant within one month. Failing which opposite parties is directed to repay an amount of Rs.6609/- along with 12% interest from 29/11/12 till the realization of the amount. No cost or compensation is ordered.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 27th day of April, 2018.
Sd/-
SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR (PRESIDENT)
Sd/-
SRI. BENNY. K. (MEMBER)
APPENDIX
Depositions :
On the side of the Complainant :
Nil
On the side of the Opposite Party :
Nil
Exhibits :
On the side of the Complainant :
Ext.P1 - The statement of account from 20/11/12 to 15/03/16
Ext.P2 - The pass book
On the side of the Opposite Party :
Nil.
Forwarded by Order,
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
