District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No.117/2023.
Date of Institution: 15.02.2023.
Date of Order: 29.5.2024.
Rameshwar Bansal aged about 59 years son of Shri S.R.Bansal, R/o House No. 169, Sector-17, Faridabad. Adhaar No. 426806982904.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
M/s. Tata Capital Housing Finance Limited, Office at: SCO-4, Ist floor, Sector-16, Faridabad, Haryana through its Divisional Manager/Principal
…Opposite parties……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Indira Bhadana………….Member.
PRESENT: Sh. Sandeep Gupta , counsel for the complainant.
Sh.Manish Sharma , counsel for opposite party.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant had obtained a loan from the respondent vide loan account No. TCHHF0350000100086667 on 29-06- 2021 for Rs. 72,13,849/- on interest @ 12.5% per annum (Floating) and the said loan was payable by the complainant in monthly installment. The complainant had repaid the entire loan amount much before the period of EMIS, the details of payment made by the complainant to the respondent are as under:-
a) Rs. 10,00,000/- on 04-06-2022
b) Rs. 10,00,000/- on 16-06-2022
c) Rs. 15,00,000/ 30-07-2022
d) Rs. 25,00,000/ 05-09-2022
e) Rs. 10,00,000/- on 07-09-2022
Accordingly, the complainant got the said loan account closed on 07-09-2022. After receiving the Foreclosure letter from the respondent, the complainant realized that the respondent had illegally charged a sum of Rs. 3,37,152/ as Foreclosure charges and Rs. 1,18,609/- interest for the above said period, whereas, the complainant had made much amount than the EMIs and hence, the respondent was to deduct the interest from the received principal amount made by the complainant and hence, the complainant raised the claim of above said entire amount of Rs. 4,55,761/- and then the respondent has refunded a sum of Rs. 3,37,152/- to the complainant but did not refund the above said illegal charged interest. The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:
a) pay the above said amount of Rs. 1,18,609/- with interest 12.5% per annum from the date of illegal charge of interest till realization.
b) pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite party put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that the complaint had not made co-borrowers ie. Mrs. Savita Bansal, Mr. Raishav Bansal and M/s Perfect Chem Engineering Pvt. Ltd. as necessary party, therefore in view of the misjoinder of parties, the present complaint is liable to be dismissed. The complainant along with Mrs. Savita Bansal, Mr. Rishav Bansal and Perfect Chem Engineering Pvt Ltd. as co-borrowers had approached the respondent company to avail a Home Equity Loan Facility and the same had been used for business purposes. Based on the application, representations and assurance to repay the loss amount as per the scheduled terms a loan amount of Rs. 72,00,000/- was sanctioned to the complainant and the co-borrowers vide loan sanction letter dated 17/03/2018. The loan facility was availed at a floating rate of interest of 10.5% as per the RPLR (Retail Prime Lending Rate) dated the sanction letter and the same was subjected to terms and conditions envisaged in the loan sanction letter and the agreement thereafter. The variable Rate of Interest was subject to change in accordance to the change in the internal and external factors but not limited to the guidelines and changes recommended by the regulatory authorities from time to time. During the loan tenure on 29 May 2021 the complainant had availed the moratorium facility post which the loan account was restructured basis on the request of the complainant. The restructuring of the loan account was well guided by the terms and conditions of the loan restructuring terms and condition mentioned under loan restructuring letter. This consumer complaint was devoid of any cause of action against the Respondent and the Respondent unnecessarily being implicated in this present complaint as the loan account of the complainant had been closed and moreover as a gesture the respondent company had waived off and refunded the amount towards the foreclosure charges and the other charges applicable onto the loan account the complainant under the shadow of the present consumer complaint was trying to extort the money from the responding company. The complainant had requested the respondent company to foreclose the loan account, thus on September 7, 2022 a foreclosure report was generated and was duly shared with the complainant. On the bare perusal of the said foreclosure letter, it was evident that the foreclosure report amounting to Rs. 1563163/- was inclusive of the foreclosure charges and the other charges (inclusive of retrieval charges) which were applicable to the loan account in terms of the guidelines of the regulatory authorities as the loan facility was a non-individual home equity loan facility with the end use purpose of business. However, as a matter of gesture to give some resort towards the account being restructured due to hardship of covid pandemic, the said foreclosure charges and the other charges (inclusive of retrieval charges) amounting to Rs. 343642/- was refunded to the complainant thus the effective foreclosure amount collected from the complainant was Rs. 1219521/-. It was submitted that the borrowers including complaint had availed loan facility from the Respondent to use the amount for commercial purpose whereby complaint had used the fund for commercial profit and gain. It was clearly established that the relationship between the Respondent and of the complainant does not fall within the definition of the 'consumer' under the Consume Protection Act, 2019 and is liable to be dismissed. Opposite party denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party–Tata Capital Housing. with the prayer to: a) pay the above said amount of Rs. 1,18,609/- with interest 12.5% per annum from the date of illegal charge of interest till realization. b) pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW-1/A – affidavit of Rameshwar Bansal, Ex.C-1 - letter dated September 07,2022, Ex.C-2 – Acknowledgement receipt,Ex.C-3 – home loan statement. Loan account information as on 19.06.2023
Shri Sanchit Arora, counsel for opposite party has suffered a statement that written statement already filed by me be read as evidence on behalf of opposite party and closed the same. Accordingly, evidence on behalf of the opposite party has been closed vide order dated 15.2.2024.
6. In this case, the complainant has obtained a loan from the respondent vide loan account No. TCHHF0350000100086667 on 29-06-2021 for Rs. 72,13,849/- on interest @ 12.5% per annum (Floating) and the said loan was payable by the complainant in monthly installment. The complainant has repaid the entire loan amount much before the period of EMIS, the details of payment made by the complainant to the respondent vide Ex.C-3 which are as under:-
a) Rs. 10,00,000/- on 04-06-2022
b) Rs. 10,00,000/- on 16-06-2022
c) Rs. 15,00,000/ 30-07-2022
d) Rs. 25,00,000/ 05-09-2022
e) Rs. 10,00,000/- on 07-09-2022
Accordingly, the complainant got the said loan account closed on 07.092022. As per letter dated 07.09.2022, vide Ex.C-1 opposite party has charged a sum of Rs.3,37,152/- as foreclosure charge @ 4% of principal outstanding (inclusive of GST). As per the statement furnished by the complainant vide Ex.C-3 in which the
total debit amount : Rs. 77,68,301/-
Credit amount : Rs.76,49,391.79
Balance amount : Rs.1,18,909.21.
7. Keeping in view of the above calculations as well as the evidence led by the complainant, the Commission is of the opinion, that the opposite party has charged illegally charged interest from the complainant. Hence, deficiency in service on the part of opposite party has been proved. Resultantly, the complaint is allowed. Opposite party directed to:
a) refund an amount of Rs.1,18,609/- as prayed for alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. from the date filing of complaint till its realization.
b) pay Rs.5500/- as compensation as compensation for causing mental agony & harassment
c) pay Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 29.05.2024. (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
