Haryana

Karnal

CC/487/2024

Ramesh Kumar Bisyaan - Complainant(s)

Versus

The HDFC Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Sudhakar Mittal

15 Oct 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

                                                          Complaint.No.487 of 2024

                                                          Date of instt. 08.10.2024

                                                          Date of Decision: 15.10.2024

 

Ramesh Kumar Bisyaan son of Ram Dhari Bisyaan, resident of Village Dabarthala, P.O. Sidpur, Tehsil Nilokheri, Karnal, Haryana, 132117.

         ...…Complainant

                                        Versus

The HDFC Bank Branch 3395, Gold Loan Branch, Kunjpura Road, Karnal 132001.

                                                                .....Opposite parties.                           

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Before       Sh. Jaswant Singh………President.    

                Mrs.Neeru Agarwal…….Member

                Mrs.Sarvjeet Kaur..……… Member.

                       

Present:  Shri Sudhakar Mittal, counsel for the complainant.

                         

                Today the case is fixed for consideration on the point of admissibility.

2.             Brief facts of the complaint are that complainant had taken gold loan of Rs.1,43,000/- against gold jewellery in the month of July 2021. The complainant made payment of interest to the OP without any delay or default. In the year 2023 the complainant had made six months advance payment of interest amounting Rs.8580/- to the OP as complainant had to go to Australia. Complainant on returning back from Australia visited the office of OP in order to return the loan amount. On enquiry it was told by the OP that the gold being kept with them had been sold on 30.09.2023 and after adjusting the loan amount remaining amount of Rs.60,000/- had been reimbursed to the complainant through DD already sent to the complainant by post. The complainant requested the OP to return back his gold after obtaining the loan plus  interest amount but they flatly refused to do so. Hence, the present complaint.

3.             Arguments on the point of admissibility heard. Record perused.

4.             The complainant has alleged that he has obtained the gold loan in the month of July 2021 and thereafter, he had gone to Australia after depositing an amount of Rs.8580/- as six months interest. The maturity date for the loan amount was fixed as 25.02.2023 but when the complainant returned from Australia, he approached the OP for making payment of loan amount and to return the gold ornaments, but he was surprised when OP informed that they had sold the gold ornaments and after adjusting loan amount remaining amount of Rs.60,000/- had been reimbursed to him through demand draft.

5.             A careful perusal of the file reveals that the complainant has not deposited not even a single penny of the loan amount. The OP has sold the gold ornaments as per the terms and conditions of the loan agreement and recovered its loan amount. Hence, there is no cause of action arisen to file the present complaint in favour of the complainant.

6.             Hence, in view of the above, the present complaint is hereby dismissed in limine being devoid of merits. Parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and file be consigned to the record room.

Dated:  15.10.2024.            

                       President,  

District Consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission, Karnal.

(Neeru Agarwal)          (Sarvjeet Kaur) 

    Member                     Member