Foreclosure charges should not be applicable to individual borrowers as per the National Housing Bank guidelines.

ORDER

Padma Pandey, Member - This appeal is directed against the order dated 15.09.2017, rendered by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, UT, Chandigarh (in short 'the Forum' only), vide which, it dismissed Consumer Complaint bearing No.406 of 2016.

2. The facts, in brief, are that the complainant took a Housing Loan of Rs. 1,08,15,910/- @ 12% from the Opposite Parties on 14.05.2014. Copy of the sanction letter is Annexure C-1. It was stated that after due passage of time, the complainant approached Canara Bank for borrowing a Home Loan, as the rate of interest charged by them was much lower than the Opposite Parties. The said Bank agreed to sanction a Home Loan to the complainant, therefore, he approached the Opposite Parties and requested them to accept the full and final payment of the said loan, for which, the Opposite Parties had charged Rs. 2,38,821/- from the complainant towards foreclosure charges vide letter dated 24.09.2015. It was further stated that the complainant made repeated requests vide emails (Annexures C-4 to C-7) and legal notice (Annexure C-8) to the Opposite Parties to refund the aforesaid amount, but to no avail. It was further stated that due to the aforesaid act and conduct of the Opposite Parties, the complainant suffered a lot, which amounted to deficiency in service and indulgence into unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties. When the grievance of the complainant was not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the "Act" only), was filed.

3. In their written statement, the Opposite Parties, while admitting the factual aspects of the case, have stated that the present complaint filed by Sh.Ajay Partap Singh, whereas, the said loan was availed by Sh.Ajay Partap Singh, Meetika and APS Retail Pvt. Ltd. but the co-borrowers have not been made party to the complaint and, as such, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. It was further stated that the Opposite Parties charged the foreclosure charges as per terms & conditions of the loan agreement and governing guidelines issued by the National Housing Bank. It was further stated that the replying Opposite Parties were neither deficient, in rendering service nor indulged into unfair trade practice.

4. The complainant, filed rejoinder to the written statement of the Opposite Parties, wherein he reiterated all the averments, contained in the complaint, and refuted those, contained in the written version of the Opposite Parties.

5. The parties led evidence, in support of their case.

6. After hearing Counsel for the parties and, on going through the evidence, and record of the case, the Forum, dismissed the complaint, as stated above.

7. Feeling aggrieved, the instant appeal, has been filed by the appellant/complainant.

8. We have heard the Counsel for the parties, and have gone through the evidence and record of the case, carefully.

9. Counsel for the appellant/complainant has submitted that the Forum failed to appreciate that the complainant and his wife had put their signatures on various documents in the capacity of Director of the Private Limited Company as guarantor's. He further submitted that the said Company does not have any relation with the loan in dispute, as the property mortgaged in favour of the said home loan is in the personal name of the complainant's wife Smt.Meetika and the instalments qua the said loan are being paid from the account of the proprietorship firm of the complainant and not from the account of the said private limited company. He further submitted that the Forum has wrongly come to the conclusion that the name of the borrowers are mentioned as Ajay Pratap Singh, Meetika and M/s APS Retail Pvt. Ltd. (on page No.12 of the loan agreement dated 13.06.2014) - Annexure A-14. However, the Forum has failed to take into account the loan application form dated 16.04.2014, in which, it did not mention private limited company as co-appl