By Sri. Mohamed Ismayil.C.V, Member
The grievance of the complainant is as follows:-
1. The complainant availed a housing loan of Rs. 3,83,000/- (Rupees Three lakh eighty three thousand only) from the opposite party. The interest of the loan amount was fixed at a floating rate of 8.5%. The complainant contented that he repaid entire instalments without any failure. At the time of availing loan, the repayment of instalments were fixed in 3 categories. As per agreement, the repayment of first phase of 60 instalments were fixed @ EMI Rs. 2,865/- (Rupees Two thousand eight hundred and sixty five only) covering a period of 11/01/2005 to 10/01/2010. The second phase was fixed @ EMI Rs. 3,716/- (Rupees Three thousand seven hundred and sixteen only) for 60 monthly instalments covering the period of 11/01/2010 to 10/01/2015. The final phase covered the period of 11/01/2015 to 10/01/2020 in which the complainant was instructed to pay Rs. 5,605/- (Rupees Five thousand six hundred and five only) per each month. So on the basis of agreement the complainant had to pay a total of Rs. 7,31,160/- to the opposite party as loan repayment. In addition to the above said amount, the complainant also remitted Rs. 29,285/- (Rupees Twenty nine thousand two hundred and eighty five only) to the opposite party on different occasions. After the completion of loan repayment, the complainant approached the opposite party for collecting the deposited documents. But the opposite party informed that Rs. 2,68,088/- (Two lakh sixty eight thousand and eighty eight only) is the existing loan due and directed to pay the said amount to close the loan and so as to take back the documents. It is stated in the complaint that as per the explanation of opposite party, the change in the interest rate caused an abnormal hike in the total repayment amount. Subsequently the complainant approached the Banking Ombudsman, but turned down on the ground that there exists an agreement between the parties as to collect the instalments in accordance with the changed rate of interest. It is contended by the complainant that the opposite party did not inform him about the changes of rate of interest pertaining to the loan from time to time. The deficiency in the service of the opposite party caused a huge financial loss to the complainant by way of penal interest. On 12/11/2020, the complainant compelled to remit Rs. 2,91,194.33/- for the closure of loan. It is stated by the complainant that he altogether remitted an excess amount of Rs. 6,68,639.33/-(Six lakh sixty eight thousand six hundred and thirty nine rupees and thirty three paisa only) for a loan of Rs. 3,83,000/- from the opposite party. According to the complainant, due to the negligence of the opposite party, he was forced to repay 3 times more of the loan amount. When calculating the entire amount paid to the opposite party, it can be found that the opposite party collected the instalment amount at the rate of 10.5% interest from the complainant. The act of the opposite party is a violation of loan agreement. The complainant stated that even though he had remitted Rs. 5,52,040/- without fail for 148 months from the date of availed loan, but the balance loan amount is shown as Rs. 3,85,537/- which is implicating collection of excessive rate of interest by the opposite party. According to the complainant, he had no need to go to the bank for repayment of instalments as being a salaried person every EMI was deducted from his account regularly by the opposite party. Moreover the opposite party could have collect more amount as EMI in accordance with the increase in the rate interest as there was sufficient amount kept in his account. It is stated by the complainant that the opposite party acted deficiently to make unlawful gain from the complainant and causing huge financial loss to him. Even if the interest is fixed at the rate of 10% in a diminishing method, the maximum amount is to be paid Rs. 7,40,833/- (Rupees Seven lakh fourty thousand eight hundred and thirty three only ). But the opposite party collected exorbitant amount of Rs. 10,51,639/- from the complainant. So it is contended by the complainant that the opposite party is liable to refund Rs. 3,10,806/- along with interest. So the complainant approached this Commission to get an direction to the opposite party to refund Rs. 3,10,806/- as the exorbitant amount collected as interest for the loan amount from the complainant. The complainant also prayed for a direction to the opposite party to pay Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) as compensation to the complainant for the sufferings of mental agony and hardship due to the negligent act of the opposite party. The complainant also claimed as Rs. 25,000/- as the cost of the proceedings from the opposite party.
2. The complaint is admitted on file and issued notice to the opposite party. The opposite party received the notice and entered appearance through counsel on 18/07/2022. But the version was not filed within the statutory period as contemplated in the statute. On 17/10/2022 the opposite party filed IA 695/2022, accept the version. But the Commission dismissed the application. So the Commission does not consider the version of the opposite party for adjudicating the matter.
3. The complainant adduced evidence by way written chief affidavit. The complainant also produced documents and those documents are marked as Ext. A1 to Ext. A7 documents. Ext. A1 document is the copy of loan sanction letter dated 11/06/2004 issued by the opposite party to the complainant. Ext. A2 document is the copy of letter dated 30/06/2020 issued by the complainant to the opposite party requesting to release the documents. Ext. A3 document is the copy of letter dated 07/03/2020 issued by the opposite party to the complainant stating the details of outstanding amount of the loan. Ext. A4 document is the copy of complaint dated 01/09/2020 filed before the Banking Ombudsman. Ext. A5 document is the copy of order dated 17/11/2021 made by the Banking Ombudsman. Ext. A6 document is the copy of loan account statement showing the details of repayment of loan. Ext. A7 document is the copy of account statement of the complainant covering the period of 01/04/2004 to 31/03/2005.
4. Heard the matter. Perused documents and affidavit. The points arisen for the consideration of the Commission are:
Whether there is any kind of unfair trade practice or deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
Relief and cost
5. Point No.1 and 2:-
The complainant availed a loan of Rs. 3,83,000/- from the opposite party with interest rate of 8.5% at a floating rate and the loan period was stipulated for 15 years. The complainant produced copy of loan sanction letter issued by the opposite party and same is marked by the Commission as Ext. A1 document. According to the complainant, he had to repay a total of Rs. 7,31,160/- to the opposite party as per the agreement. It is averred by the complainant that in addition to the above stated amount he was compelled to pay Rs. 29,285/- to the opposite party. The complainant further stated that he had remitted entire loan amount as stipulated in the agreement. But when the complainant approached the opposite party for the documents deposited at the time sanction of the loan, the opposite party again demanded Rs. 2,68,088/- from the complainant as due amount of loan for releasing documents. The complainant produced the letter dated 30/06/2020 issued to the opposite party for releasing the documents and said letter is marked as Ext. A2 document. It is categorically stated by the complainant that there is no information from the opposite party regarding the hike in the interest rate. So the complainant was forced to remit the demanded amount to close the loan. The complainant produced letter issued by the opposite party showing the outstanding balance amount as Rs. 2,68,086.30/- and same is marked as Ext. A3 document. Then the complainant approached the Banking Ombudsman with a complaint and copy of the complaint is marked as Ext. A4 document. The copy of order of the Banking Ombudsman is marked as Ext. A5 document. The copy of detailed statement of loan repayment is produced by the complainant and marked as Ext. A6 document. In addition to Ext. A6 document, the complainant also produced the copy of transaction statement of his account during the period of 01/04/2004 to 31/03/2005 and same is marked as Ext. A7 document. Going through the evidences adduced by the complainant it can be seen that he had remitted a huge amount to the opposite party. According to the complainant he had not received any information with regard to change in the rate of interest. Ext. A1 document shows that interest rate is 8.5%. But the opposite party did not collect the EMI as per changed rate of interest from him even though sufficient amount was available in his account. The complainant contacted the opposite party, but Ext. A3 document does not address the grievances raised by the complainant. It is proved by the complainant that the opposite party had collected an exorbitant amount of Rs. 3,10,806/- from the complainant in violation of Ext. A1 document. The Commission finds that the opposite party has committed deficiency in service towards the complainant. There is no contra evidence available in this case. The contention of the complainant is stands proved. So the complainant is allowed in the following manner.
The opposite party is directed to refund Rs. 3,10,806/- (Rupees Three lakh ten thousand eight hundred and six only) to the complainant with 9% interest per annum from the dated of order till the date of realisation.
The opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only) to the complainant for the sufferings of mental agony and hardship due to the deficiency in service of the opposite party.
The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) to the complainant as the cost of the proceedings.
The opposite party shall comply this order within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order otherwise the opposite party shall pay additional 9% of interest to the total amount order to pay within 30 days of receipt of copy of the order.
Dated this 27th day of March, 2023.
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A
Ext.A1 : Document is the copy of loan sanction letter dated 11/06/2004 issued by the
opposite party to the complainant.
Ext.A2 : Document is the copy of letter dated 30/06/2020 issued by the complainant
to the opposite party requesting to release the documents.
Ext.A3 : Document is the copy of letter dated 07/03/2020 issued by the opposite
party to the complainant stating the details of outstanding amount of the
loan.
Ext.A4 : Document is the copy of complaint dated 01/09/2020 filed before the
Banking Ombudsman
Ext.A5: Document is the copy of order dated 17/11/2021 made by the Banking
Ombudsman.
Ext.A6 : Document is the copy of loan account statement showing the details of
repayment of loan.
Ext.A7 : Document is the copy of account statement of the complainant covering the
period of 01/04/2004 to 31/03/2005.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Nil
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
