Complaint Case No. CC/749/2015 |
| | 1. Suresh | Suresh, S/o C.G.Chandragowda, D.No.3/226, Bannimantap Extension, K.R.Nagara Town, Mysuru District. |
| ...........Complainant(s) | |
Versus | 1. The TATA Capital Financial Service Ltd. | The Manager, The TATA Capital Financial Service Ltd., No.1010, 1st Floor, Surya Prasad Complex, Udayaravi Road, Kuvempunagar, Mysuru-570023. |
| ............Opp.Party(s) |
|
|
ORDER | BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023 CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.749-2015 DATED ON THIS THE 15th April 2016 Present: 1) Sri. H.M.Shivakumara Swamy B.A., LLB., - PRESIDENT 2) Smt. M.V.Bharathi B.Sc., LLB., - MEMBER 3) Sri. Devakumar.M.C. B.E., LLB., - MEMBER COMPLAINANT/S | | : | Sri Suresh, S/o C.G.Chandrfagowda, D.No.3/226, Bannimantap Extension, K.R.Nagra Town, Mysuru District. (Sri M.D.Kumar, Adv.) | | | | | | V/S | OPPOSITE PARTY/S | | : | The Manager, The TATA Capital Finance Service Ltd., No.1010, 1st Floor, Surya Prasad Complex, Udayaravi Road, Kuvempunagar, Mysuru-570023. (EXPARTE) | | | | | |
Nature of complaint | : | Deficiency in service | Date of filing of complaint | : | 07.11.2015 | Date of Issue notice | : | 18.11.2015 | Date of order | : | 15.04.2016 | Duration of Proceeding | : | 5 MONTHS 7 DAYS |
Sri Devakumar.M.C. Member - The complainant filed the complaint under section 12 of the C.P.Act, against the opposite party, seeking a direction to refund `5,700/- paid on 13.08.2015 along with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. and to pay `10,000/- towards damages for the mental agony and deficiency in service and such other reliefs.
- The complainant applied for loan with opposite party and deposited a sum of `5,700/- on 13.08.2015 towards processing fee. The opposite party failed to sanction loan and informed the same vide letter dated 19.09.2015. On repeated approach and demand also, the opposite party neither repaid the amount deposited along with interest nor sanctioned the loan amount. Thereby, aggrieved complainant filed this complaint seeking reliefs.
- In spite of service of notice, the opposite party remained absent and hence placed exparte.
- The complainant filed his affidavit and placed several documents to establish the facts. Written arguments filed and made oral submissions. On perusal of the material on record, the matter posted for orders.
- The points arose for our consideration are:-
- Whether the complainant established the deficiency in service by opposite party in not sanctioning the loan even after receipt of process fee and in not refunding the process fee along with interest and thereby he is entitled for the reliefs sought?
- What order?
- Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:
Point No.1 :- Partly in the affirmative. Point No.2 :- As per final order for the following :: R E A S O N S :: - Point No.1:- The complainant submits that, he intending to avail loan for construction of his house, applied to opposite party company and deposited a sum of `5,700/- on 13.08.2015 through a cheque bearing No.303522 towards processing fee. Even after repeated demands, the opposite party fail to sanction any loan to the complainant. The opposite party issued a rejection letter dated 19.09.2015 to the complainant, stating that at present it is not unable to grant any loan. The complainant started demanding the amount i.e. `5,700/- along with interest at 18% p.a. But the opposite party fail to repay the amount nor sanctioned the loan amount. A legal notice was caused on to the opposite party on 20.10.2015, calling upon to repay `5,700/- along with interest at 24% p.a. and damages of `10,000/- within 15 days of the notice. The opposite party neither replied nor refunded the amount. Thereby, alleged the deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and sought for the reliefs.
- On perusal of the material on record, the complainant established that he had paid a sum of `5,700/- on 13.08.2015 vide cheque bearing No.303522, in favour of the opposite party. The rejection letter dated 19.09.2015 confirmed that the loan had not been sanctioned in favour of the complainant. However, the rejection letter does not disclose the reason for rejection of the loan application, despite of receipt of `5,700/- towards the process fee. In view of not sanctioning the loan amount, the opposite party ought to have repaid the amount deposited along with reasons for rejection of the loan amount. As such, the complainant is entitled to receive the amount deposited with interest and the opposite party is liable to pay compensation for the mental agony and for deficiency in service. Accordingly, the point No.1 is answered partly in the affirmative.
- Point No.2:- In view of the above observations, we proceed to pass the following
:: O R D E R :: - The complaint is allowed in part.
- The opposite party is hereby directed to pay `5,700/- along with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of complaint i.e. 07.11.2015 to the complainant, within 30 days of this order.
- The opposite party shall pay a sum of `2,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and deficiency in service and `500/- towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant, within 30 days of this order. In default, the opposite party shall pay interest at 18% p.a. on the total sum of `2,500/-until compliance is made.
- In case of default to comply this order, the opposite party shall undergo imprisonment and also liable for fine under section 27 of the C.P.Act, 1986.
- Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules.
(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on this the 15th April 2016) | |