DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, Civil Station, Palakkad 678001, Kerala
Dated this the 30th day of April, 2010
Present: Smt.Seena.H, President Smt.Preetha.G.Nair, Member Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K, Member
C.C.No.135/2008
Pradeep Achuthan, S/o.K.P.Achuthan Kutty, Sree Kailas, Kumaramputhur, Mannarkkad, Palakkad. - Complainant (By Adv.M.P.Ravi)
Vs
The Manager, Indus Ind Bank Ltd., Palakkad Branch, Chandranagar, Palakkad. - Opposite party (By Adv.A.Gourisankar& Adv.G.Ananthakrishnan)
O R D E R
By Smt.Preetha.G.Nair, Member
Case of the complainant is as follows:
The complainant had availed a vehicle loan of Rs.3,65,000/- from the opposite party vide contract No.EPAA02987 dt.04/01/2007. Opposite party has collected four signed blank cheques from the complainant. Though the opposite party disbursed the loan amount, they did not give the repayment schedule and loan statement to the complainant. Complainant requested for the repayment schedule but he was informed that since all the loans are processed at its Cochin office, the repayment schedule have to be given by Cochin office. The complainant was also informed that the agreement value of contract No.EPAA02987 is for Rs.4,78,300/- which includes
the loan amount of Rs.3,65,000/-, finance charges of Rs.80,300/- and insurance deposit of Rs.33,000/-. Two days later the complainant sought a clarification why an insurance deposit of Rs.33,000/- is included in the total agreement value instead of debiting the insurance charges to the loan account as and when it is due. Complainant has also sought an explanation why the opposite party should debit the insurance charges when the complainant is timely insuring the vehicle and what right the opposite party has to charge interest and penal interest on a deposit made by the complainant. The opposite party was unable to answer the clarification sought by the complainant and advised him to submit a written complaint. Instead of repeated requests the opposite party did not give the loan statement and repayment schedule and hence the complainant preferred complaint before the Senior Executive of the opposite party's bank in December 2007.
During January 2008 opposite party visited the complainant's office and informed their decision to correct the mistake of collecting the insurance deposit and to execute a fresh loan agreement with new contract number, reducing the agreement value and correcting the financing charges. He was assured by the opposite party that they have decided to avoid the co-obligation of a guarantor in the new contract. Based on the request and assurance of the opposite party, he signed a new set of agreement and submitted to the opposite party. The opposite party had assured the complainant that the previous agreement would be returned to the complainant along with loan statement and repayment schedule within a period of two weeks. Complainant was requested to continue the monthly repayment of Rs.12,250/- till the bank makes the correction. Believing the opposite party, in the
absence of loan statement and repayment schedule, the complainant kept on repaying Rs.12,250/- per month. Complainant submits that the opposite party did not cancel and return the 1st agreement and assured to return second agreement. Opposite party proposed to finance the private vehicle used by the complainant at special rate of interest and complainant agreed if they corrects the existing loan account by crediting the excess amount collected from him to the loan account and if the opposite party agrees to transfer the loan proceedings of proposed loan to the existing loan and if the opposite party agrees to avoid all processing charges of the newly proposed loan. The opposite party informed the complainant that he would be contacted again based on direction from bank's state head. Complainant informed the opposite party that he requires only 2 lakhs as the new loan and that he will pay the balance amount to close the first loan account. Agreeing to it, the opposite party made the complainant sign a loan agreement and directed him to get hypothecation of the bank endorsed in the registration certificate. But opposite party has not sanctioned the loan. Later the opposite party sent a letter to Regional Transport Officer, Mannarkkad to cancel the hypothecation of second vehicle. Opposite party assured the complainant that his loan account would be regularized within one week. When he contacted the Regional Transport Officer, Mannarkked they informed the complainant that the hypothecation is done in favour of Cochin branch and hence the cancellation issued by the Palakkad branch is void and illegal. The complainant was subjected to lot of hardship and a letter for cancellation of hypothecation was given to the complainant, after two weeks, collecting a letter from him.
Though the complainant was given assurances by opposite party, it did not give a loan statement and repayment schedule and first agreement to the complainant. Then the complainant informed the opposite party he would repay the loan only after receiving the statement of accounts. Again he sent a letter to opposite party requesting necessary action. On 28/10/08 the Branch Manager and Regional Manager of the opposite party bank visited the complainant and submitted a statement of account based on the first contact without correcting mistake. Opposite party failed to rectify the defect and also failed to return the first two agreements. This amounts to clear deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.
Hence the complainant prays an order directing the opposite party a) to return the second and third agreements executed by the complainant in favour of the opposite party, b) to issue a fresh repayment schedule after deducting the huge financial charges and insurance deposit and to issue a fresh statement of account after giving credit of the entire amount repaid by the complainant. c) to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) towards the mental agony, stress and strain, financial loss suffered by the complainant and other reliefs.
Opposite party filed version contending the following. The complainant has availed a vehicle loan from them and executed and delivered the necessary documents. The complainant had hypothecated the vehicle so purchased. Complainant has not given any blank cheques as stated in the complaint. The complainant has to repay the loan amount as per the schedule incorporated in the
loan agreement in 47 instalments. Complainant paid 17 instalments. From 3rd instalment onwards the complainant did not pay the instalment on due dates. He has not paid any instalment from 07.06.08. The insurance deposit has not been collected in advance as stated in the complaint. The amount has been shown as payable. But when the complainant produces the insurance policy the amount is reversed/credited to his account without receiving payment. If the complainant does not pay the insurance premium the opposite party may pay the same. The finance charges of Rs.80,300/- is the interest amount agreed between the parties at the time of entering into the loan agreement @ 5.5% flat on principle amount of Rs.3,65,000/- for the entire period.,
Meanwhile the complainant had approached the opposite party for another loan promising to clear the outstanding balance in his first loan. The complainant insisted for the loan and to show his bonafides got form 34 signed from this opposite party bank prior to the sanction of the loan. But the complainant was not willing to clear the outstanding balance of the 1st loan. Opposite party submits that complainant is trying to avoid the repayment of the instalments by filing this complaint. Opposite party does not have any other agreement except the 1st one for Rs.3,65,000/-.
There has been no mistake in the terms of the agreement and only what has been agreed between the parties have been incorporated in the agreement. Opposite party submits that the complaint is not maintainable and it is to be referred to arbitration. This opposite party has not taken any steps to seize the vehicle illegally though they reserves the rights to repossess the same.
Complainant filed chief affidavit and documents. Exts.A1 to A4 marked on the side of complainant. Opposite party also filed affidavit and documents. Exts.B1 to B7 marked on the side of opposite party. Matter was heard.
Issues to be considered are; Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party? If so what is the relief and cost?
Issues 1 & 2: We perused relevant documents on record. It is an admitted fact that the complainant has availed a loan from the opposite party for the purchase of a vehicle. The opposite party stated that complainant has not given any blank cheque as stated in the complaint. The loan amount has to be repaid in 47 instalments. The opposite party stated that the complainant has paid 17 instalments and from the 3rd instalment onwards the complainant did not pay instalment on due dates. Further the opposite party stated that the insurance deposit has not been collected in advance as stated in the application. The amount has been shown as payable. Opposite party admitted that when the complainant produce the insurance policy the amount is reversed/credited to his account without receiving payment. The complainant has not produced the insurance policy. As per Ext.B1 the opposite party sanctioned and disbursed Rs.3,65,000/- as vehicle loan. Opposite party admitted that the finance charges of Rs.80,300/- is the interest amount agreed between the parties at the time of entering into the loan agreement, which is calculated at 5.5% for the entire principal amount of Rs.3,65,000/-. As per Ext.B1 and Ext.B3 the complainant had
signed and promised to pay the sum of Rs.4,78,300/- with interest at the rate of 5.5% per annum. According to Ext.B5 the opposite party stated the details of cheques furnished by the complainant. The complainant stated that the opposite party has collected four signed blank cheques. But the complainant has not produced cheque numbers or counter foil of cheques. Also the complainant has not produced evidence to show that four signed blank cheques issued to the opposite party . Complainant stated that the opposite party visited his office and informed that the bank has decided to correct the mistake of collecting the insurance deposit in advance and requested for a fresh loan agreement to be executed with new contract number reducing the agreement value and correcting the financing charges. The complainant based on the request and assurance of the opposite party signed a new set of agreement and submitted to the opposite party. Further complainant stated that believing the opposite party in the absence of loan statement and repayment schedule the complainant kept on repaying Rs.12,250/- per month. But the complainant has not produced any documentary evidence to prove these facts. The complainant has not taken any steps to call for the documents from the opposite party. Further the complainant stated that he requires only Rs.2 lakhs as the new loan and that he will pay the balance amount to close the first loan account. Agreeing to it, the opposite party made the complainant sign a loan agreement again and directed him to get hypothecation of the bank endorsed in the registration certificate. Hypothecation was endorsed and the opposite party again cheated the complainant by not sanctioning the loan. The complainant has not produced the registration certificate. The first prayer of the complainant is that directing the opposite party to return second and third agreements executed by the complainant in
favour of opposite party. But the complainant miserably failed to prove that he executed second and third agreements in favour of the opposite party.
According to Ext.B1-page 2- 2.7, statement of accounts and confirmation of balance, “the lender shall, as on 31st March of every year, send to the borrower, a statement of account drawn as on March 31, showing the amount due, the interest charged etc. to the borrower. Unless the borrower notifies the non-receipt of this statement or points out any discrepancy therein within 15 days of sending such statement by certificate of posting. It shall be presumed that the borrower has agreed and accepted that the amount stated therein is due and outstanding against him.
In this case the loan agreement is made on 04/01/2007. As per Ext.A1 dt.21/12/2007 the complainant sent letter to the opposite party demanding the copy of loan sanctioning letter and detailed repayment schedule. According to Ext.A4 repayment schedule issued by the opposite party to complainant dt.28/10/2008. In short the opposite party has not complied the provision 2.7 statement of accounts and confirmation of balance in loan agreement. In the above discussions we hold the view that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Hence the complaint partly allowed.
We direct the opposite party to issue a fresh repayment schedule and statement of account after giving credit of the entire amount repaid by the complainant and to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as compensation and
Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) as cost to the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order failing which the whole amount shall carry interest @ 9% p.a from the date of order till realisation.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 30th day of April, 2010. Sd/- Seena.H President
Sd/- Preetha.G.Nair, Member Sd/- Bhanumathi.A.K, Member Appendix Witnesses examined on the side of complainant Nil Witness examined on the side of opposite party Nil Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 – Copy of letter dt.21/12/07 sent by complainant to opposite party Ext.A2 - Copy of letter dt.22/09/08 sent by complainant to opposite party Ext.A3 - Copy of letter dt.15/10/08 sent by complainant to opposite party Ext.A4 – Photo copy of payment schedule for the contract No.EPAA02987 Exhibits marked on the side of opposite party Ext.B1 – Loan Agreement Ext.B2 – Irrevocable Power of Attorney Ext.B3 – Demand Promissory Note Ext.B4 – Statement of Account for the Contract No.EPAA02987 as on 17/12/09
Cost (Allowed) Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) as cost
| | HONORABLE Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K, Member | HONORABLE Smt.Seena.H, PRESIDENT | HONORABLE Smt.Preetha.G.Nair, Member | | 
