SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

SHAM SUNDER, DEV RAJ
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK – Appellant
Versus
AJIT GOEL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Jatin Kumar, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Gunjan Rishi, Advocate, for the Respondent

ORDER

Sham Sunder, President - This order shall dispose of the aforesaid two First Appeal Nos. 301 of 2013 titled as Standard Chartered Bank v. Ajit Goel and Another, and 331 of 2013 titled Ajit Goel and Another v. Standard Chartered Bank, arising out of the common order dated 7.6.2013, rendered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (hereinafter to be called as the District Forum only), vide which, it allowed Consumer Complaint, bearing No. 327 of 2012, and directed the Opposite Party (now appellant in First Appeal No. 301 of 2013 and respondent in First Appeal No. 331 of 2013) , as under:

"Hence, we are of the opinion that foreclosure charges of 4.41% levied by the Opposite Party on the Complainants at the time of foreclosure have been wrongly levied as they have not been provided in terms of the agreement placed on record by the Opposite Party. Also levy of annual charge of Rs. 1,32,002 is not part of the agreement and hence, to our mind, not leviable by the Opposite Party. This complaint is allowed accordingly. The Opposite Party is directed to refund the total amount of foreclosure charges taken from the Complainants, as well as the amount of Rs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top