Date of Order: 23.04.2010<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 23RD DAY OF APRIL 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 /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1369, 1370, 1386, <br /> 1388 & 1390 OF 2009<br /> <br /> Shreehari<br /> S/o. B.R. Padmanabha<br /> No. 111, 10th Main, Lakkasandra Extension<br /> Bangalore 560 039 Complainant<br /> V/S<br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1369 OF 2009<br /> Date of filing : 15.06.2009<br /> The Manager<br /> The HDFC Bank<br /> Represented by its Manager<br /> HDFC House, No. 51, Kasturba Road<br /> Bangalore 560 001 Opposite party<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1370 OF 2009<br /> Date of filing : 15.06.2009<br /> The Manager<br /> The Axis Bank<br /> No. 119, 80 feet Road, 7th Block<br /> Koramangala<br /> Bangalore 560 095 Opposite party<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1386 OF 2009<br /> Date of filing : 17.06.2009<br /> The Manager<br /> The IDBI Bank<br /> No. 326, Ashiwini Complex, 1st floor<br /> Junction of 6th Cross, 80 feet Road<br /> Opp. Spencer Super Market<br /> Indiranagar, Bangalore 560 038 Opposite party<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1388 OF 2009<br /> Date of filing : 17.06.2009<br /> The Manager<br /> The Kotak Mahindra Bank<br /> No. 501-3, 5th Floor, Rehaja Towers<br /> 26-27, M.G. Road<br /> Bangalore 560 001 Opposite party<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1390 OF 2009<br /> Date of filing : 17.06.2009<br /> The Manager<br /> The Deutch Bank<br /> Personal Loan Division<br /> Next to Shankaranarayan Buildings<br /> Bangalore 560 001 Opposite party<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> These five complaints are clubbed together for passing common orders since, the complainants in all the five cases are one and the same and the relief asked by the complainant against opposite parties is almost one and the same. Therefore, these five complaints could be conveniently clubbed and a common order could be passed. <br /> The complainant has sought relief against the opposite parties to direct the opposite parties to reschedule and restructure the repayment of loan amount by extending payment period to 12 years in respect of loan obtained by him and direct the opposite parties to reduce interest and direct the opposite parties to reconsider representation made by the complainant. <br /> 2. The respective opposite parties have filed their defence version stating that complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. Complainant is mis-using the process of law. The complainant is defaulter. There is no cause of action to file the complaint. This forum has no jurisdiction to grant any relief to the complainant. Complainant has misused the provisions of Consumer Protection Act. It is social welfare legislation. Complaint is liable to be dismissed with exemplary costs and therefore, the opposite parties requested to dismiss the complaint.<br /> 3. The respective parties have filed affidavit evidence.<br /> 4. Arguments are heard. <br /> 5. The points for consideration are:<br /> 1. Whether the complaints are maintainable?<br /> 2. Whether the complainant has proved any deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties?<br /> 3. Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief? <br /> 6. In similar nature of complaint filed by the present complainant Mr. Sree Hari, this forum has already taken opinion that complaints of present nature are not maintainable and the complaints of present complainant have been dismissed. Likewise, the complainant has also filed similar nature of complaints against banks and financial institutions before the I Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum and there also, these complaints have been dismissed as not maintainable. In the present cases also there is no possibility of taking different view which had already been taken in the earlier complaints filed by the present complainant himself. Therefore, the present complaints are liable to be dismissed. The complainant has not proved any deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. Therefore, question of granting any relief does not arise. Moreover these matters cannot be decided by the present fora. If the complainant has got any problem of repayment of loan he has to approach the respective banks and settle the issue amicably by negotiation and talk. Secondly, the complainant has to move and file his representations before the Banking Ombudsman constituted under the RBI guidelines. Banking Ombudsman is a competent authority to decide issues which have been raised by the present complainant. Thirdly, this is a case of the complainant that he has given representation to the respective banks to reconsider and restructure the payment schedule. If it is so, it is up to the respective banks to consider his representation in a pragmatic and practical manner considering the difficulties and the problems of the complainant. There is nothing wrong to apply the mind on the representation of the complainant and convey the decision taken by the respective banks to the complainant. This observation will be sufficient for the complainant. However, it is up to the banks and the complainant to sit together and settle the issues amicably. The present complaints filed before this fora for issuing directions and reduction of interest etc. are not maintainable. Therefore, the complaint deserves to be dismissed. In the result I proceed to pass the following:<br /> ORDER<br /> 7. The complaints are dismissed.<br /> 8. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 9. Keep the copy of the order in connected case files. <br /> 10. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2010. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER<br />