Order No. 14 dt. 13/11/2017
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant for obtaining loan from the o.p. approached the o.p. for which the loan was sanctioned for purchasing of a flat by the complainant and the EMI was fixed at Rs.3600/- per month and it was decided that the complainant will have to pay the EMI 180 installments in respect of obtaining the loan to the tune of Rs.4 lakhs from o.p. The complainant at the time of obtaining loan handed over the valuable documents viz. one LIC (money back) policy value of Rs.1,50,000/- matured dt. 2019 and one fixed deposit of Rs.1,27,000/-. The complainant paid total amount of Rs.5 lakhs i.e. 139 EMIs and the complainant is continuously paying loan amount to o.p. The complainant all on a sudden received a letter from o.p. bank on 31.12.15 asking the complainant to pay outstanding amount of Rs.2,97,291/-. The complainant was informed by o.p. that the EMI is floating not fixed, so the EMI amount increased from 8.25% to 11.20% and the complainant was asked to pay the balance amount. Since the complainant was never informed regarding the floating rate of interest the complainant became astonished for which the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.p. bank for acceptance of the interest @ 8.25% as per sanctioned letter and also asked for compensation of Rs.5 lakhs and litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.
The o.p. contested this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that the complainant chose to have the housing loan under floating rate of interest which was PLR 2.75% (Prime Lending Rate less 2.75%) @ 8.25% for loan for 15 years to 20 years periodically at the time of said sanction of said loan where as the fixed rate of interest at the time of for such housing loan was @ 9.25%. As the PLR keep changing as per the direction of RBI, the interest rate of said loan of the borrower kept changing which is also reflected in his loan account statement. The complainant was well aware of the fact about the change in installment on increase / decrease in PLR and as such, there is no deficiency in service whatsoever. The complainant has misused the legal process to delay the recovery proceeding initiated by the bank and thus this present application has been filed which should be rejected. It was further stated that the complainant was asked to pay the outstanding loan amount amounting to Rs.2,97,291/- as stood on 31.12.15 and after coming to know of the said fact the complainant filed this case. the complainant was fully aware about the fact of the loan had been sanctioned at floating rate and the complainant chose to have floating rate of interest from the date of sanction as the fixed rate of interest was 1% higher than the effective rate of interest under floating rate. On the basis of the said fact o.p. prayed for dismissal of the case.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:
- Whether the complainant took the loan from o.p.?
- Whether the complainant agreed to pay the interest at fixed rate or floating rate of interest?
- Whether the complainant paid the interest on the basis of the floating rate of interest or fixed rate of interest?
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of o.ps.?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons:
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant for obtaining loan from the o.p. approached the o.p. for which the loan was sanctioned for purchasing of a flat by the complainant and the EMI was fixed at Rs.3600/- per month and it was decided that the complainant will have to pay the EMI 180 installments in respect of obtaining the loan to the tune of Rs.4 lakhs from o.p. The complainant at the time of obtaining loan handed over the valuable documents viz. one LIC (money back) policy value of Rs.1,50,000/- matured dt. 2019 and one fixed deposit of Rs.1,27,000/-. The complainant paid total amount of Rs.5 lakhs i.e. 139 EMIs and the complainant is continuously paying loan amount to o.p. The complainant all on a sudden received a letter from o.p. bank on 31.12.15 asking the complainant to pay outstanding amount of Rs.2,97,291/-. The complainant was informed by o.p. that the EMI is floating not fixed, so the EMI amount increased from 8.25% to 11.20% and the complainant was asked to pay the balance amount. Since the complainant was never informed regarding the floating rate of interest the complainant became astonished for which the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.p. bank for acceptance of the interest @ 8.25% as per sanctioned letter and also asked for compensation and litigation cost.
Ld. lawyer for the o.p. argued that the complainant chose to have the housing loan under floating rate of interest which was PLR 2.75% (Prime Lending Rate less 2.75%) @ 8.25% for loan for 15 years to 20 years periodically at the time of said sanction of said loan where as the fixed rate of interest at the time of for such housing loan was @ 9.25%. As the PLR keep changing as per the direction of RBI, the interest rate of said loan of the borrower kept changing which is also reflected in his loan account statement. The complainant was well aware of the fact about the change in installment on increase / decrease in PLR and as such, there is no deficiency in service whatsoever. The complainant has misused the legal process to delay the recovery proceeding initiated by the bank and thus this present application has been filed which should be rejected. It was further stated that the complainant was asked to pay the outstanding loan amount amounting to Rs.2,97,291/- as stood on 31.12.15 and after coming to know of the said fact the complainant filed this case. the complainant was fully aware about the fact of the loan had been sanctioned at floating rate and the complainant chose to have floating rate of interest from the date of sanction as the fixed rate of interest was 1% higher than the effective rate of interest under floating rate. On the basis of the said fact o.p. prayed for dismissal of the case.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainant took the loan from o.p. bank for purchasing a flat and the loan was sanctioned to the complainant with the EMI of Rs.3600/- per month and the EMI was to be liquidated by paying the entire amount in 180 installments. The moot question arose between the parties that whether the complainant was provided the loan by o.p. at a fixed rate of interest of 8.25%. On perusal of the sanctioned letter for purchasing the flat whereby it was clearly stated that the rate of interest was fixed at 8.25% per annum over / less PLR under floating / fixed rate of interest. It is also an admitted fact that before filing of the case the complainant made various correspondences with o.p. and o.p. clarified to the complainant as to why such amount was demanded by o.p. In the letter itself it was mentioned that at the time of sanction of loan, the prevalent rate of bank’s PLR was 11% and accordingly the effective rate in the loan account at that time was 8.25% i.e. PLR 2.75% . Accordingly, the EMI at that time was fixed tentatively as Rs.8600/-. The PLR is fixed by the bank according to the direction of RBI and it varies from time to time. The change of rate of PLR amply publicized through the bank branches and website. Every movement of rate will affect the EMI. Accordingly if the rate increases the EMI will increase and vice versa. Since the complainant paid EMI @ Rs.3600/- only ignoring the change in PLR the account became irregular at times. To wipe out the irregularity particular point of time a sum of Rs.84,852/- and Rs.3700/- were transferred from the S.B. account of the complainant and said amount was credited in the account of housing loan account. Since the complainant paid less amount than that of the actual EMI ought to be paid after the enhancement of the rate of interest the bank accordingly asked the complainant to repay the amount. The complainant in order to avoid the payment of the amount or avoiding any legal proceedings the bank may take for realization of the due amount the complainant rushed to this Forum and filed this case making wild allegation against the bank. Therefore we hold that the case filed by the complainant has got no merit and the complainant will not be entitled to get any relief as prayed for. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered,
That the CC No.125/2016 is dismissed on contest without cost against the o.p.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
