By Smt. Beena. M, Member:-
This is a complaint filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019
2. Facts of the case in brief: On 02-02-2021, the Complainant approached the Opposite Party bank for loan for the purpose of renovation of house owned by the Complainant. The loan amount was fixed as Rs.10 lakhs after detailed discussion with the opposite party. Then the Complainant entrusted entire documents to the Opposite Party, after verification of documents, the Opposite Party directed to entrust the counsel of bank SajiPongalayil,Pulpally. The Complainant then approached the counsel of Opposite Party and on 25.03.2021 obtained scrutiny report from the counsel stating that the Complainant is eligible for housing loan and when the Complainant loan application on 05-05-2021 to the Opposite Party, they offered loan within a short period. Believing the words of Opposite Party, the Complainant collected loan from different parties and shops, then he continued the construction. On request for disburse the loan amount, the Opposite Party protracted the disbursement alleging one reason or another. The then manager was transferred and a new manager had taken charge, then offered the disbursement of amount within short period, but protracted the loan disbursement without any reason and after repeated requests, the Opposite Party has not attended the Complainant and not even ready to attend the phone calls, subsequently the Opposite Party told that they are not ready to disburse the loan amount. Then, the Complainant approached the lead bank and lodged a complaint in writing and that complaint was forwarded to the Opposite Party and in reply, the Opposite Party issued a letter stating that the Complainant is not meeting the eligibility criteria for housing loan and especially the Income proof. The act of Opposite Party is unfair trade practices, since the Complainant is an account holder and salary is credited in the account operated by the Complainant in Opposite Party bank. Moreover, the Complainant is having income from agriculture and other sources and village officer issued certificate to that effect. The rejection of loan application caused undue hardship to the Complainant since he had spent Rs.10,000/- for arranging documents and legal opinion from the panel advocate and moreover by trusting the words of the Opposite Party the Complainant had given advance to the contractor and for the construction materials. The act of Opposite Party is unfair trade practice and negligence on the part of the Opposite Party caused loss and damages to the Complainant and pain and suffering of the Complainant could not be measured in terms of money and the Opposite Party is liable to compensate the Complainant. The loss of Complainant:-
- Preparation of estimate - 13,000/-
- Certified copies of documents - 4,500/-
- Location sketch and certificate - 2,000/-
- Income certificate inspection etc - 2,000/-
- Survey and other expenses - 4,800/-
- Photo copies etc - 102/-
- Expenses of inspection of OP - 1,200/-
- T. A etc to bank and revenue, Sub registrar - 3,000/-
And panchayath offices
Total - - Rs.30,602/-
Hence the Complainant filed this complaint.
4. Notice was served to Opposite Party and they appeared and filed version.
5. The version filed by the Opposite Party is as follows: The Opposite Party admitted that the Complainant has submitted a loan application for loan for renovation of house for Rs.10,00,000/- to the Opposite Party and the Opposite Party directed to obtain scrutiny report from the counsel of bank. And further it is admitted that the Complainant obtained legal scrutiny report from the counsel. The allegation of the complainant is that the Opposite Party offered the loan within short time” is totally false and denied by the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party has not given any assurance to the Complainant that the bank will sanction the loan. On verification of the details furnished by the Complainant, the Opposite Party found that it was not meeting the eligible criteria for the housing loan as per the scheme guidelines of the Bank, which was intimated by the Opposite Party to the Complainant. The allegation that the Complainant believed the words of this Opposite Party and obtained loan from different parties, shops and continued construction and the new Manager offered disbursement of the amount within short period and protracted the loan disbursement without any reason etc are totally false and alleged only for this complaint. The other allegations are there was unfair trade practice from the side of this Opposite Party is false and denied by this Opposite Party and the rejection of loan application caused hardship to the Complainant and he had spent Rs.10,000/- for arranging documents and legal opinion and given advance to the contractor etc are totally false and hence denied by the Opposite Party. The Complainant had not met the eligibility criteria for the subject loan as per the scheme guidelines of the Bank which has already been intimated to the Complainant. The Complainant was directed to submit the documentary proof of income ie, ITR for the last 3 years, latest salary certificate, 6 month salary slips etc for the salary income and other incomes that the Complainant had mentioned in the loan application. But the Complainant had failed to submit the above documents. Hence the Opposite Party had informed the Complainant vide letter, dated 04.09.2021, that the Opposite party could not process the loan application and would consider positively if the Complainant submits all the relevant document in full as per the scheme guidelines of the Bank. The Opposite Party further submits that the bank has every right to reject the loan on considering different aspects like, income of the applicant, study of the proposed plan, repayment capacity of the party and other aspects. And it is not a right of the party to get the loan without satisfying banks norms. Further the opposite Party has not given any assurance to the Complainant that the bank would sanction the loan. There is no delay in processing the loan application. The Opposite Party has given letter in time to the Complainant mentioning the reason for rejection of the loan. There is no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party. The Complainant is not entitled to get any relief as claimed in the complaint. As far as there is no unfair trade practice from the part of the Opposite Party, the complaint is liable to be dismissed as against the Opposite Party. In view of the above it is evident that the averments and allegations mentioned in the complaint against this Opposite Party are frivolous and vexatious and is liable to be dismissed. And the Complainant is not liable to get any compensation from the Opposite party. The Opposite Party prayed to dismiss the complaint with cost of the opposite Party.
6. On perusal of complaint and documents the Commission raised the following points for consideration:
1. Whether any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?
2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for any relief as prayed for?
7. The Complainant was examined as PW1 and the documents produced were marked as Ext. A1 to A3.
8. Point No.1 & 2:-These points are considered together for the sake of brevity and convenience. Ext.B1 and B2 marked from the side of Opposite Party.
9. It is an admitted fact that the Complainant has applied for loan of Rs.10,00,000/- on 20-04-2021 from Opposite Party bank. Ext. A2 shows that the annual income of the Complainant is Rs.3,00,000/-. The contention of the Opposite Party is that they have not given any assurance to the Complainant that the bank will sanction the loan. On verification of the details furnished by the Complainant, the Opposite Party found that it was not meeting the eligible criteria for the housing loan as per the scheme guidelines of the bank. The further contention of the Opposite Party is that the Complainant was directed to submit the documentary proof of income(ITR for last 3 years), latest salary certificate, 6 months salary slip etc for the salary income and other incomes that the Complainant had mentioned in the loan application. But the Complainant had failed to submit the documents.
10. From the documents filed by the Complainant, it appears that the Complainant secured some documents but not all as required by the Opposite Party bank. At the time of examination the Complainant deposed that ‘’Hcp tcJ lmPcm¡m³ ]dªp. AXv 3 hÀjs¯ income tax return BWv”. This deposition of the Complainant shows that the Complainant has not submitted all the documents required by the bank. Moreover, there is no satisfactory material to show that the Complainant complied with all the requirements to process the loan. Simply because the Complainant applied for loan, there is no obligation on the bank to sanction the loan. Further, the case of the Complainant is that in anticipation of sanction of loan, he had obtained loan from different parties, shops and continued the construction and had given advance to the contractor and for the materials thereby the Complainant sustained loss of Rs.30,602/-. There is no proof that the Opposite Party has given any prior assurance to the Complainant regarding sanction of loan. Here the Opposite Party bank has nothing to do with the acts of the Complainant prior to sanction of loan. Further, nothing prevented the Complainant from approaching some other bank for loan, if the Opposite Party bank has been delaying sanction of loan. Under these circumstances, the Opposite Party is not liable to reimburse any loss sustained by the Complainant prior to sanction of the loan. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed without cost.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 5th day of April 2024.
Date of Filing:-12.10.2021.
PRESIDENT : Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
APPENDIX
Witness for the Complainant:-
PW1. Shiju Aliyas. Business.
Witness for the Opposite Party:-
Nil.
Exhibits for the Complainant:-
A1. Copy of Loan Application. Dt:20.04.2021.
A2. Copy of Income Certificate. Dt:26.03.2021.
A3. Copy of Reply Letter. Dt:04.09.2021.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party:-
B1. Copy of Letter. Dt:01.09.2021.
B2. Copy of Reply Letter. Dt:04.09.2021.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
CDRC, WAYANAD.
Kv/-
