FINAL ORDER/JUDGMENT   

SMT. SUKLA SENGUPTA, PRESIDENT

            The complainant one Tushar Nandi as filed this claim application U/s 35 of the CP Act 2019 as amended up to date.

            The fact of the case in brief is that the complainant obtained a personal loan amounting to Rs.  50,000/- only from the OP-1 India Bulls Finance Ltd. Prior to taking loan, the complainant furnished all short of required documents and his financial  track report to the personal of the OP-1, financer and being satisfied the OP-1 approved the application for personal loan for the complainant.  It was numbered a Loan Account No. IPERKOL08789885.

The complainant further stated in the petition of complaint that upon approval of loan application in question,  the OP  in a more strange manner had created digital wallet namely “Dhani” in favour of the complainant and had credited an amount of Rs.  43,902/-   in such digital wallet.  The complainant was extremely shocked by such arbiterally action of the man and agent of the  OPs 1 and 2. It is alleged by the complainant  that the digital  wallet namely Dhani which was credited by the OPs is technically of no  use to the complainant because neither any amount was transferred  from such wallet by the complainant to his personal savings  bank account nor any money can be withdrawal there from. So, the creation of digital wallet to the tune of Rs. 43,902/- is totally redundant  and infructuous  and it does not serve  any material purpose to the complainant  then the complainant being harassed by the activity of the OPs 1 and 2. Immediately informed the Dhani services about such irregularity and requested the man and agent of the OPs to dissolve the issue at the earliest by disbursing the credited amount in his saving accounts. No fruitful action was taken by the OPs. Despite such request then made by the complainant, it is further stated by the complainant that the digital wallet  in question was credited in faovur of the complainant  in the month of April,  2020 and from May,  2020 till date and equated monthly installment to the tune of Rs. 2,926/-  is being deducted from the savings  bank account of the complainant due to auto debit process  as applied to that effect. The complainant   requested the OPs to close the loan account and not to deduct the EMIs to the tune of Rs. 2, 926/- by email. He also requested  to stop auto debit system  that had been applied on saving bank account of the complainant  since such deduction was affecting the CIBIL Score of the complainant  as there are several other loans availed by the complainant.

It is alleged by the complainant that due to such irregular and illegal creation of digital wallet and deduction of EMIs wrongful by the OPs, the credit score of the complainants is being severally hampered.  

            It is further realization of the complainant that on 13th  Jan, 2021, and 19^th Jan  2021,  four unauthorised transactions  were made from  the complainant’s Dhani wallet. Such four unauthorized transactions  of  Rs. 5,000/- on 13th  Jan,  2020  on account  of payment to a guest and the other three unauthorized   transactions  of a sum of Rs. 4,540/- , Rs. 30,280/- and Rs 1,740/- made on 19^th  Jan, 2020 respectively  on account of payment of electricity bills, such unauthorized  transaction  of Rs.  14,560/- in total were made from Dhani wallet of the complainant by unauthorized  hacking of Dhani wallet in question. The complainant utterly supposed  to know that the personal documents, no hows and the information even by him to the Dhani services where divulged to third party by the man and agent of the OPs. The complainant took up the matter though  email and the photocopy of such emails are collectively annexed by P-1. Therefore,  the complainant  demanded  the EMIs which are debited in unathorised manner from his saving bank account. Thereafter, suddenly on Feb,  2021 a sum of Rs. 8,000/- was credited in the Dhani Wallet in question  of the complainant without making any requisition of the same. It is stated by the OPs that such requisition of Rs. 8,000/- by the OPs was completely unilateral and it was credited to the Dhani wallet in question in absence of any request from his end. So, that a sum of Rs. 123/- on account of installments for the same is being deducted from the complainant’s bank account for  a period of 10 moths till date.   On repeated request made by the complainant, nothing has been done by the OPs 1 and 2 for resolve the issues then without having any other alternative, the complainant served a legal notice upon the OPs 1 and 2 through his Ld. advocate on 10 Nov, 2021 but the OPs 1 and 2 even on receipt of said notice did not reply the same. Hence,   this case is filed by the complainant with a prayer to give direction to the OPs 1 and 2 to close and deactivate the loan account and digital wallet namely Dhani wallet of complainant.

The complainant is prayed for giving direction to the OPs to refund   a sum of Rs. 59,750/- on account of illegal deduction  of equate monthly  installments in respect of  the loan account commencing on May,  2020 and also prayed for giving direction to the OPs to pay compensation  to tune for Rs. 1,00,000/-  for deficiency  in service  harassment, mental  pain and agony  along with litigation cost  of Rs. 50,000/-.

The OPs have contested the claim application by filing a WV denying all the material allegations leveled   against them.

 It is stated by the OPs that the complainant has no cause of action to file this case.  The petition of complaint is false, frivolous and filed by the complainant with malafide intention and it is bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties rather the complainant with the intention  to avail financial assistance approached the office of the OP-1 and being satisfied with the terms and conditions of loan has availed the financial assistance.

It is further stated by the OPs that   the complainant   has applied for a personal loan facility through “Dhani” a mobile application of the Co. It is mentioned that “India Bulls Dhani” is an online mobile application whether loan application is filled and submitted by the customer himself.  The loan application is proceed by software after perusal of all the required document uploaded by customer himself. Upon approval of the loan, a sanctioned letter specifying  ROY, Charges and fees is issued. Being satisfied with the terms and conditions for the grant of loan as mentioned in the sanctioned   letter, the complainant  availed the said loan vide loan agreement loan No. IPERKOL08789885 dated 04.04.2020 for Rs.  50,000/- . The copy of personal loan details is annexed as annexure-A. 

It is further stated by the OPs that the concept of this application,  borrower shall have good knowledge about the loan details, total tenure period, EMI details and due date etc. The digital wallet is named as “Dhani”.  Through this application,   one can made various monetary transaction. So, the allegation made by the complainant regarding unable to make monetary transaction through that application is vague.  As the issue made  due to mobile handset,   due to network coverage, the complainant himself opted for a mobile wallet and as such,   there was no scope of  professional and high handed action on the part of the OPs.

It is further stated by the OPs that on the very first instance, when the loan amount was transferred to the wallet of the complainant had also applied for loan amount through Dhani a mobile application of a company. So, the allegation made by the complainant is totally false, fabricated, concocted  and harrasive.

OPs are further  stated that the alleged   loan was granted for a period of  24 months and was entered on  02.04.2020 at  6.50 PM and the complainant  has given e-sign consent and as such, the EMIs was debited from the  month of May, 2020   as per terms and conditions  of loan agreement.  The complainant himself opted   a auto debit facility at the time   of availing of loan application and he failed to produce any documents by showing that he has requested for canceling  and for stopping auto debit facility.

The OPs are further stated that once   a loan has been approved and disbursed in favour of  the  borrower/complainant. Complainant   is liable to make repayment of the loan amount  through EMIs. So, the complainant  created a concocted story  and the petition of complaint is liable to be dismissed.

In view of the fact and circumstances, the points of consideration are as follows:-

1. Is the case maintainable in its present form?
2. Have the complainants any cause of action to file the case?
3. Are  the complainants a consumer?
4. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs?
5. Are the complainants entitled to get relief as prayed for?
6. To what other relief or reliefs is the complainants entitled to get?

Decision with reasons

All the points of considerations are taken up together for convenience of discussion and to avoid unnecessary repetition.

On a close scrutiny of the materials on record, it is revealed that this commission/forum has ample jurisdiction to try this case.  The case is well maintainable in the eye of law and complainant  has cause of action to file this case.

Now let us see whether is any sort of deficiency in service on the part of the OPs or not?

It is the case of the complainant that he took a personal loan amounting to Rs. 50,000/-from the OP-1 Co. for the purpose  of discharging his personal obligations. Admittedly, the loan was granted to the complainant by the OP-1 Co. under the digital wallet named as “Dhani” and also under the loan application No. IPERKOL08789885 dated 04.04.2020 through the mobile application  i.e. “Dhani Application”. It is alleged by the complainant that  in the digital account namely “Dhani”,  OP credited an  amount of Rs. 43,902/- out of Rs. 50,000/-  and it was agreed that the complainant will repay the loan amount by equal monthly installments  of Rs. 2,926/- each within 24 months which is also admitted by the OPs in their WV and evidence. The complainant alleged that after getting the loan through digital application  “Dhani”,  he sent e-mails and msgs to the men and agent of the OPs with request to close the loan account being made by the complainant and  he also made request to stop auto debit system that had been applied on the savings bank accounts of the complainant  since such deduction was affecting the CIBIL Score of the complainant  but from the materials on record,  it appears that the complainant made transactions to the tune of Rs. 5,000/- on  13 Jan 2021 on account of  payment to a guest and other three transactions were made for a sum of Rs.  4,540/-,  Rs. 3,280/-, and Rs. 1,740/- on 19 Jan 2021 respectively on account of payment of electricity  bills,  the total amount which was debited from his account for amounting to Rs. 14,560/-  in total.  From that Dhani wallet,  though the complainant has tried to establish that this transaction  were unauthorized transactions but from the evidence on record,  it is  proved that this transaction were made by the complainant himself from his mobile set because admittedly,  the account  was made upon digital application made by the complainant under the name and style “Dhani” wallet. So, question of unauthorized  transaction by the OPs does not arise at all. Moreover, the raised allegation against the OPs that they deducted the amount by auto debit system form his A/c  but from the material and evidence on record and also from facts and circumstances of this case,  it is proved  that out of 24 installments the complainant paid only 23 installments and he had defaulted  24^th  installment  for which penal charges has been deducted.

So, from the discussion made above,   it is established  that though the complainant raised  allegation against the OP-1 Co. that the amounts were illegally deducted by the OP but it cannot be  because the complainant is the operator of his own mobile handset and except himself  nobody can make any transaction from his digital wallet.  It is not the case of the complaint   that this is the subject of cyber crime.  So, in that case the complainant himself made those  transaction   for his guest and to pay the electricity bills. In addition to that he did not pay 24th installments in respect of the loan amount in question. From which,  it can safely be held by this commission  that the  complainant  is a defaulter  in payment of the monthly  installments to the digital  loan account. “Dhani ” in question and he did not come before this commission  with clean hand. In that case   the allegation  of deficiency  in service on the part of the OPs  has no leg to stand upon and the complainant  miserably failure to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubt,  for that reason he is not entitled  to get relief as prayed for.

All the points are thus considered and decided accordingly.

The case is properly stamped.

Hence,

Ordered

that the case be and the same is dismissed on contest against OPs without any cost.

Copy of the judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for perusal.