State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
1. Gautam Ramrao Suryawanshi vs 1. I C I C I Home Finance on 14 June, 2013
1 F.A.No.:416-12
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
MUMBAI.
CIRCUIT BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
First Appeal No. FA/12/416
(Arisen out of Order Dated 10/09/2012 in Case No. 309/2011 of
District Aurangabad)
1. Gautam Ramrao Suryawanshi
Mayur Park Jalgaon Road ...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. I C I C I Home Finance
Home Finance Co. Ltd.Adalat Road
Aurangabad
MH.
2. I C I C I Home finance CO. Ltd.
Reg.Office,Landmark Alakapuri,Rekh
Cource Road,Vadodara
Vadodara
3. I C I C I Home Finance Co.Ltd.
Corporate Office Home Finance Bank
Ltd.Towers,Bandra,KurlaComplex
Mumbai
MH. ...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
HON'ABLE MR. S.M.SHEMBOLE PRESIDING MEMBER
HON'ABLE MRS. UMA BORA MEMBER HON'ABLE MR. K.B.GAWALI MEMBER PRESENT: Appellant in person ..for the Appellant Adv. U. N. Shete ..for the Respondents
-:: ORAL JUDGMENT ::-
(Delivered on 14.06.2013) PER HON'ABLE MR. S.M.SHEMBOLE, PRESIDING MEMBER 2 F.A.No.:416-12
1. This appeal is an exception to the judgment and order dated 10.09.2012 passed by District Consumer Forum, Aurangabad in consumer complaint No.903/2011 partly allowing the complaint directing the opponents/respondents to pay to the complainant Rs.15,000/- and Rs.3000/- more towards cost of the proceeding. (for the sake of brevity the appellant hereinafter is referred as "complainant" and the respondent as "opponent Finance Company")
2. We heard the complainant who is appearing in person and Shri. U. N. Shete, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
Considering the fact of the case we have decided to dispose of the appeal at the stage of hearing before admission.
3. Brief facts giving rise to the appeal are that:-
complainant Gautam Suryavanshi has obtained house loan of Rs.3,00,000/- from the respondent finance company, in the month of Oct.2004. It was agreed to repay the loan with interest by monthly installment of Rs. 2417/- and executed deed of agreement. At the same time the opponent finance company obtained 36 cheques from the complainant. It is alleged by the complainant that as per agreement he has repaid the entire loan amount and no dues were outstanding against his loan account. However, opponent finance company did not return of blank cheques which were with it, and lastly presented those cheques for clearance in ADCC Bank. However as the complainant has already cleared the dues he gave intimation to the bank to stop payment. It is also alleged that though the complainant had 3 F.A.No.:416-12 cleared all the dues, the opponent finance company has filed criminal complaint against him alleging that the cheques which were presented for clearance in the bank were bounced etc. Thus according to complainant he was harassed by the opponent finance company causing mental and physical torture and thereby committed deficiency in service. Therefore he made consumer complaint claiming refund of excess amount paid by him to the opponent finance company and further claiming compensation of Rs.3,50,000/- for causing mental and physical harassment and also for causing loss compelling him to obtain housing loan from the opponent finance company etc.
4. The opponent finance company by its written version resisted the complaint. It is not disputed that the complainant had borrowed housing loan form it and also repaid it and no dues are outstanding against his account. It is alleged that the complainant had committed default in payment of monthly installment and the cheuqes which were presented were bounced and therefore the finance company was constrained to file criminal complaint against complainant etc. It has denied all the adverse averment made by the complainant and submitted to dismiss the complaint.
5. On hearing both the sides and considering the documents on record, the District Consumer Forum held that the opponent finance company committed deficiency in service by presenting the cheques for clearance in ADCC Bank even though the complainant had cleared all the dues. Keeping with these 4 F.A.No.:416-12 findings the District Consumer Forum partly allowed the complaint directing the opponent finance company to pay compensation and cost of the proceedings to the complaint as noted above.
6. Not being satisfied with the said judgment and order the complainant has preferred this appeal.
8. It is submitted by the complainant that though his complaint was partly allowed by the District Consumer Forum, he is not satisfied with the same order as according to him District Consumer Forum has not allowed the claim for refund of excess amount of Rs.38,500/- paid by him to the opponent finance company. He has also submitted that District Consumer Forum has not granted adequate compensation though it is held that he was harassed by the finance company etc. To which it is denied by Adv. Shri. U. N. Shete for opponent finance company and submitted that considering the facts of the case the District Consumer Forum has rightly held that claim of refund of amount and compensation is not maintainable as there is no evidence on record about payment of excess amount etc.
9. On perusal of the copy of impugned judgment and order it reflects that District Consumer Forum has rightly held that in the absence of the extract of account and other documents on record, it is difficult to decide that excess amount is paid by the complainant. The record also does not reflect any evidence to the effect that the complainant has paid any excess amount 5 F.A.No.:416-12 to the opponent finance company. Therefore considering facts of the case and evidence on record in our view the District Consumer Forum has rightly granted adequate compensation rejecting the claim of the complainant for refund of amount Rs.28,500/-. We find no glaring error or infirmity in the order. Hence no interference is warranted.
10. In the result, the appeal is being devoid of any merit is liable to be dismissed summarily. Hence the following order.
-:: ORDER ::-
1. The appeal is summarily dismissed.
2. No order as to cost.
[HON'ABLE MR. S.M.SHEMBOLE] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'ABLE MRS. UMA BORA] MEMBER [HON'ABLE MR. K.B.GAWALI] MEMBER Kalyankar