Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/75/2015

M/s.V.Meena , W/o.Vasudevan - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, HDFC Bank - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.Law Thirst Assts

09 May 2022

ORDER

Date of Complaint Filed             : 29.01.2015                                                                   

Date of Reservation                    :  25.04.2022                                                        

                                                                                Date of Order                              : 09.05.2022                                                                                                                                          

 

                                                 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:  TMT. B JIJAA, M.L.,                                          : PRESIDENT

                   THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,           :  MEMBER  I 

                   THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,    :  MEMBER II

 

                                                                        CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 75 /2015

MONDAY, THE 9^th DAY OF MAY 2022

 

Mrs. V. Meena,

W/o. Vasudevan,

No.54, Gandhi Street, Athipattu,

Vallur,Chennai – 600 120.                                                                                                                 ... Complainant

..Versus..

 

The Manager,

HDFC BANK,

No.5 MIG Flats, PT Rajan Salai,

K.K. Nagar West,

Chennai – 600 078.                                                                                                                          ... Opposite Party

******

 

Counsel for the Complainant          : M/s. Lawthirst Associates

Counsel for the Opposite Party       : M/s. Pass Associates

 

        On perusal of records and after having heard the oral arguments of the Counsel for Complainant and the Counsel for the Opposite Party we delivered the following:

 

ORDER

Pronounced by the President Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,

1.       The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 (1) (C) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to release the unlawful blocking of SB account bearing No.06741050000550 of the Complainant and to pay Rs.5,00,000/- for the unfair trade practice of the Opposite Parties against the Complainant and to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation for the resultant of mental agony and pain caused by the Opposite Parties and to pay Rs.25,000/- as cost.

        The Complainant has filed his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments.Exs.A-1 to Ex.A-13 were marked on the side of Complainant. The Opposite Party has filed Written Version, Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments.Ex.B-1 to Ex.B-9 were marked on the side of Opposite Party.

2.     The facts of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

        The Complainant has availed a personal loan for Rs.1,14,000/- vide sanction letter dated 25.11.2014 in Account No.3010835 from the Opposite Party, wherein the Complainant was bound to repay the said loan in 36 EMIs of Rs.4064/- commencing from 04.12.2014 to 04.11.2017. The Complainant has handed over 3 blank cheques bearing Nos.005956, 005957 and 005958. The Complainant is maintaining the SB Account No.06741050000550 with the Opposite Party since 2008. The salary for the month of December 2008 was credited in the Complainant’s account on 29.12.2014. Already two personal loans were availed by the Complainant from the Bajaj Finance Ltd and is paying EMI for the said two personal loans. On 06.01.2015 the Complainant got a phone call from the Bajaj Finance Ltd stating that the cheques given towards EMIs were returned with an endorsement “Insufficient Funds”. The Complainant had downloaded the statement of SB account that she is maintaining with the Opposite Party and was shocked to hear the above said version of the Bajaj Finance Ltd. One of the officers of the Opposite Party explained that the Opposite Party has blocked the amount of Rs.13,325.72p in the SB Account without any lawful reason. The Complainant has sent an email to the office of the Opposite Party on 08.01.2015 to rectify the issue but there was no response from the Opposite Party. The practice adopted by the Opposite Party was against the principles and recommendations made by the RBI. The Bajaj Finance Ltd has sent two emails on 09.01.2015. The Complainant caused a legal notice to the Opposite Party on 09.01.2015 claiming EMI for the Personal Loan No.4030CD02525279 and 4030CD05051656 along with cheque bouncing charges. The act of the Opposite Party clearly shows that the Opposite Party has indulged in financial robbery. In spite of the receipt of the legal notice on 13.01.2015 the Opposite Party did not give any reply. As on the date of the complaint the name of the Complainant was not in the CIBIL and if the Opposite Party do any hasty action against the Complainant that the Opposite Party is liable to pay Rs.50,00,000/- as damages. The Opposite party has given reply email on 22.01.2015 with baseless and unfit answer for the blocking of the SB Account of the Complainant.Hence the Complaint.

3. Written Version of the Opposite party in brief are as follows:-

The Complainant has not given the true and correct information regarding her two loan account No.11623185 & 30108315, as she availed a Personal Loan amount of Rs.19,850/- on 15.06.2007 and Personal Loan of Rs.1,14,000/- on 25.10.2014. The Complainant approached the Opposite Party for Personal Loan and accordingly Personal Loan has been sanctioned and disbursed to her and had utilized the same. The Complainant has also executed the loan agreement after fully understanding the terms and conditions mentioned therein and agreed to repay the said first loan amount in 24 monthly installmentsof Rs.1387/- each and for second loan amount in 36 monthly installments of Rs.4064/- each. The Complainant has not been prompt in paying the dues for the said Loan No.11623185. Further as per mail dated 15.01.2015 requested to clear the overdue amount pertaining to Loan Account No.30108315. If there is any dispute there is specific clause that they must go for arbitration. The Complainant not repaid the installment in the due dates. The Complainant did not adhere the agreement signed at the time of availing personal loans and failed to pay the installment as scheduled in the agreement. The Complainant has hardly made out any case for deficiency or negligence and thus the claim for alleged compensation is far fetched and not real and the same cannot be entertained by this Hon’ble Commission. The Opposite Party further submitted that the Complainant issue legal notice on 09.01.2015 for the same Opposite Party issued reply on 21.01.2015 and the same was acknowledged by the advocate of Complainant on 24.01.2015. The prayer in the complaint is totally a civil nature and the Complainant is to approach the proper forum to get relief. Therefore prays to dismiss the complaint.

4.      The Points for consideration are:-

1.     Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

2.     Whether the complainant is entitled to get compensation as claimed in the complaint?

3.     To what relief, the complaint is entitled?

 

5.      Point No.1:-

 

The Complainant is maintaining the SB Account bearing No.06741050000550 with the Opposite Party since 2008. The salary of the Complainant is being credited in the said SB Account. The Contention of the Complainant is that she had taken two personal loans from Bajaj Finance Limited.  EMIs for the loans availed from Bajaj Finance Limited were honoured in terms of the ECS option in the said SB Account of the Complainant. Though the Complainant was maintaining sufficient balance in the SB Account, EMI’s in respect of the Bajaj Finance Limited were returned with an endorsement “Insufficient Funds”.  On enquiry it was found that the Opposite party has blocked the SB Account of the Complainant.

The contention of the Opposite Party is that, the Complainant has taken two Personal Loans from the Opposite Party namely Loan Account No.11623185 for a sum of Rs.19,850/- on 15.06.2007 and Loan Account No.30108315 for a sum of Rs.1,14,000/-on 25.11.2014. Though the Complainant contented that she has availed only one Personal Loan of Rs.1,14,000/- in Loan  No.30108315 on 25.11.2014 from the Opposite party, as per Ex.B-4 it is found that the Complainant had  availed the Personal Loan  No.11623185 for a sum of Rs.19,850/- as early as 15.06.2007. The contention of the Complainant that the Opposite Party has exercised lien over the SB Account of the Complainant without prior notice does not hold good in view of the Ex.A 13 which is the notice issued by the Opposite Party calling upon the Complainant to repay the outstanding due of Rs.61,842.00 in respect of the Loan Account No.11623185.  It is clearly mentioned in the notice that failure to pay the total outstanding by the Complainant resulted in the holding of funds of SB Account of the Complainant in exercise of Banker’s Lien.

Reliance is placed by the Opposite Party on the Judgment reported in AIR 2014 Ker 64 passed in W.P.(C)N0.30600 of 2013 wherein it was held that the Bank is entitled to retain as security the gold ornaments pledged till the personal loan is also cleared. Bank has the right to exercise general lien unless there is a contract to contrary between the borrower and the Bank whereby the right of general lien could be statutorily waived. The burden is always on the borrower to establish that ‘a contract to the contrary’ existed to rebut the existence of the right of general lien by the bank. In this case the Complainant had not pleaded or proved that there was a contract to the contrary disabling the Opposite Party from exercising the right of general lien.

Hence the act of the Opposite party in Holding funds of the SB Account of the Complainant with prior notice to the Complainant and in exercise of Banker’s lien for the outstanding due of the personal Loan Account No.11623185 availed by the Complainant does not amount to deficiency in service. Accordingly, Point No. 1 is answered.

6.      Point No.2 and 3:-

We have discussed and decided that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party and thereby Complainant is not entitled to get any reliefs as claimed in the complaint. Accordingly, Point Nos. 2 & 3 are answered.

In the result this complaint is dismissed. No cost.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on this the 9^th day of May   2022.

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                     B.JIJAA

        MEMBER II                            MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:

Ex.A1	25.11.2014	Personal loan sanctioned letter by the Opposite Party to the Complainant
Ex.A2	07.01.2015	Loan summary of bajaj finance personal loan No.4030CD02525279
Ex.A3	07.01.2015	Loan summary of Bajaj finance personal loan No.4030CD 05051636
Ex.A4	07.01.2015	Download statement of SB account No.06741050000550 of Opposite Party
Ex.A5	08.01.2015	E-mail sent by the Complainant to the Opposite Party
Ex.A6	09.01.2015	E-mail sent by the Bajaj Finance Ltd to the Complainant
Ex.A7	09.01.2015	E-mail sent by the Bajaj Finance Ltd to the Complainant
Ex.A8	09.01.2015	Legal notice caused by the complainant to the Opposite Party
Ex.A9	13.01.2015	Acknowledgement card for legal notice dated 09.01.2015 caused to the Opposite Party
Ex.A10	15.01.2015	E-mail by Opposite Party to the Complainant
Ex.A11	20.01.2015	Receipt No.67413342 as second EMI for the personal Loan No.30108315 paid by the Complainant to the Opposite Party
Ex.A12	22.01.2015	E-mail sent by the Opposite Party to the Complainant
Ex.A13	21.01.2015	Reply legal notice by Opposite Party to the Complainant

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Party:

Ex.B1	04.05.2007	Salary certificate issued by the Complainant’s Employer
Ex.B2	15.06.2007	Loan Application Form
Ex.B3	19.06.2007	Telephonic verification sheet by the Opposite Party
Ex.B4	15.06.2007	Loan agreement
Ex.B5	14.10.2014	Application form and proof address by the Complainant
Ex.B6	24.10.2014	Insurance by the Opposite Party to the Complainant
Ex.B7	24.10.2014	Loan agreement
Ex.B8	20.01.2015	Statement of Accounts for Loan A/c No.11623185
Ex.B9	20.01.2015	Statement of Accounts for Loan A/c. No.30108315

 

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN                  T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                          B.JIJAA

        MEMBER II                              MEMBER I                             PRESIDENT