The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of res-judicata in the context of the Consumer Protection Act and the competence of the Consumer Forum to decide the issue of settlement of accounts.

ORDER :

1. The challenge in the civil revision petition is against the order of the Munsiff's Court, Kolencherry finding the suit, O.S. No. 12 of 2017, filed by the South Indian Bank (hereinafter “the Bank”) against the revision petitioners, to be maintainable. The original petition is filed by the Bank challenging Ext.P6 order of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ernakulam in E.A. No. 2 of 2019 in C.C. No. 505 of 2015 filed by Sri. Anil Paul (hereinafter ‘the petitioner’). The essential facts, leading to the impugned orders, are as under:

The petitioner along with his wife was sanctioned housing loan of Rs. 6,75,000/- on 03.09.2004. The loan amount, with interest at the rate of 8%, was repayable in 120 equal monthly installments of Rs. 7,290/- each. Petitioner remitted the installments without default and after remitting the 120th installment, requested the Bank to close the loan account and return the title deeds given as security. To the petitioner’s surprise, he was told that a further amount of Rs. 4,43,284/- was outstanding and the loan could be closed only after payment of the balance amount. Thereafter, the Bank issued notice to the petitioner stating that his EMI had actually been fixed at the rate of Rs. 6,880/- per mensem and the rate of interest had been enhanced and hence, the petitioner is bound to pay the balance amount. The obstinate stand of the Bank compelled the petitioner to approach the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (CDRF), alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. After hearing the parties, the CDRF, allowed the complaint and directed the Bank to settle and close the housing loan account of the petitioner by calculating interest at the rate of 8% per annum till the date of first communication regarding hike in the interest rate, as reflected from the records of the Bank and acknowledged by the petitioner. The Bank was also directed to return the title documents within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order, after petitioner settling the account as per the direction. The Forum also mulcted the Bank with the liability of paying compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and costs of Rs. 5,000/- within one month.

2. During pendency of the complaint before the CDRF, the Bank filed O.S. No. 12 of 2017 before the Munsiff's Court, Kolencherry seeking to recover an amount of Rs. 5,71,783.67/- from the petitioner and his wife. In the wake of the CDRF order, the bank amended the plaint by reducing the amount sought to be recovered to Rs. 1,61,383/-. The petitioner entered appearance and contended that the suit is barred by res-judicata since the issue had already been decided by the CDRF. The objection was repelled by the learned Munsiff finding that CDRF to be incompetent to settle the account and to direct calculation of interest at the rate fixed by the Forum. The learned Munsiff held that the suit is not barred by res-judicata, since the CDRF is not competent to decide the issue involved in the suit.

3. On his part, the petitioner filed execution petition before the CDRF stating that in compliance of the Forum's order, he had calculated the balance amount due, following the method available on the Bank's website. The amount arrived at was Rs. 1,03,483/- and after deducting the cost and compensation amounting to Rs. 15,000/- the balance amount of Rs. 85,500/- had been remitted to his loan account on 25.09.2018. It was stated that, despite remittance of the amount, officials of the Bank refused to return the security documents. The petitioner therefore sought issuance of warrant of arrest against the respondent invoking power under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. On being convinced that the judgment debtor had failed to comply with its direction, the CDRF addressed the District Collector to initiate proceedings against the Manager of the Bank for realisation of the amount of Rs. 15,000/- ordered towards compensation and cost. The Bank is aggrieved by the said order.

4.