Date of Filing: 09.12.2009<br /> Date of Order: 30.06.2010<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2010<br /> <br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2910 OF 2009<br /> Smt. K.V. Kumari,<br /> And Sri N. Chinnaswamy,<br /> No.5, 3rd C Cross,<br /> Choolur Palya, Magadi Main Road,<br /> Bangalore-23. Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> 1) The Manager, <br /> M/s. National Trust Housing Finance Ltd.,<br /> No.49/B, 1st Floor, 11th Cross, 9th Main,<br /> 2nd Block, Jayanagar, Bangalore-11. <br /> <br /> 2) National Trust Housing Finance Ltd.,<br /> No.1/1B, Subramanian Building,<br /> Club House Road, Off. Anna Salai, <br /> Ground floor, Chennai-2. Opposite parties<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> By the President Sri S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed by the complainant. The brief facts of the case are that, the complainant had obtained Rs.4,00,000/- loan in June 2006, from the opposite party. From June 2006 to July 2009, the complainant had paid total amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. The complainant wanted to pay the entire loan amount and asked the opposite party how much amount to be paid for closing account. The opposite party directed to complainant to pay Rs.3,00,000/- for closing the loan account. Accordingly, on 7-8-2009 the complainant has paid the amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. Again the opposite party demanded Rs.40,000/- for handing over all the documents. On 10-9-2009 the complainant has paid Rs.32,200/- and demanded return of documents. But, the opposite party did not return the documents. Again, the complainant had paid Rs.23,702/- to the opposite party on 24-11-2009. In this way the complainant has paid Rs.3,55,902 to the opposite party and taken back original documents. The complainant submitted that she has paid 3 installments extra for the month of August, September and October 2009, even though she was liable to pay the 3 installments. Therefore, the opposite party demanded refund of the extra amount paid by her with compensation for mental agony. <br /> 2. The opposite party has filed defense version stating that, admitting the payment made by the complainant of Rs.3,00,000/- on 7-8-2009. Payment of Rs.32,200 on 10-9-2009, is also admitted. Payment of Rs.23,702/- is also admitted. The opposite party submitted that the complainant has not produced any documents based on which she is claiming excess amount. The opposite party has not committed any deficiency in service. The complainant has failed to substantiate allegations. Therefore, the opposite party prayed to dismiss the complaint. <br /> <br /> 3. The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence. The opposite party also filed his affidavit evidence. Heard, the arguments on both the sides. <br /> 4. In the light of the arguments advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties, the following points arise for consideration:-<br /> <br /> 1. Whether the complainant has proved deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party?<br /> 2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the refund of excess amount paid to the opposite party?<br /> 3. What order and relief?<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 5. It is an admitted fact that the complainant had taken loan of Rs.4,00,000/- in June 2006, from the opposite party. The monthly EMI is Rs.6,836/-. The complainant had paid EMI from June 2006 to July 2009, in all Rs.2,00,000/-. The complainant wanted to close the account by paying the entire balance and asked the opposite party as to how much amount shall be deposited. The opposite party directed the complainant to deposit Rs.3,00,000/- for closure of account. Accordingly on 7-8-2009, the complainant deposited Rs.3,00,000/- and demanded return of original documents. The opposite party has produced account statement Exhibit R1. As per their own account statement it has been clearly mentioned “cash received on 7-8-2009 deposited to ICICI Rs.3,00,000/-” in the statement it is stated to be collected amount is Rs.29,786/-. The complainant admittedly had deposited Rs.32,200/- on 10-9-2009. The complainant has produced temporary cash receipt Sl. No.577.dated 10-9-2009 of the opposite party. As per the opposite party statement on 7-8-2009, Rs.3,00,000/- was received from the complainant and amount to be collected was shown Rs.29,786/- where as the complainant has paid more than that amount, i.e., Rs.32,200/- on 10-9-2009. The opposite party should have given No Due Certificate and handed over the original documents to the complainant. But, unfortunately the opposite party demanded still more amounts i.e., 3 EMIs. The complainant since wanted documents and without any help out of her helplessness she was forced to pay another sum of Rs.23,702/- on 24-11-2009, to this effect the complainant has produced cash receipt voucher. This fact had been clearly admitted by the opposite party in a defense version. As per the statement produced by the opposite party itself the amount to be collected was only Rs.29,786/- as on 7-8-2009 and on 10-9-2009, the complainant has paid Rs.32,200/- the more amount than the due amount. Therefore, the question of again collecting Rs.23,702 on 24-11-2009, does not arise at all. This amount is clearly extra amount paid by the complainant. By the statement of account produced by the opposite party itself it has been proved beyond doubt that the opposite party has collected more amounts from the complainant. Therefore, the opposite party has committed deficiency of service in collecting extra amount from the complainant even though she was not at all due. The opposite party is bound to return the extra amount received from the complainant. The complainant is women belonging to weaker section of the society, the opposite party under misconception and without justification collected extra amount from the helpless lady. Therefore, it is the duty of the opposite party to refund extra amount collected. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:-<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 6. The complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to refund Rs.23,702/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order. In the event of non compliance of the order within 30 days the above amount carries interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of order till payment / realization. <br /> 7. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 8. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2010. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings <br /> <br /> MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br />