BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : HYDERABAD.

FA.NO.473 OF 2020 AGAINST ORDERS IN CC.NO.21 OF 2019, DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION-MEDAK AT SANGAREDDY Between:

The Branch Manager State Bank of India, Eddumallaram Ordinance Factory Branch, Ordinance Factory Estate, Eddumallaram, Sagareddy District, Telangana – 502 205.

.…Appellants/Opp.Parties And Sri Korepur Ramachandra Rao, S/o.Korepu Narsimlu, Aged: 63 years, Occ: Retd.Govt.Teacher, R/o.H.No.5-11/110/25, Brindavan Teacher’s Colony, Navyanagar, Ameenpur Mandal, Sangareddy District, Telangana – 502 032.

…..Respondent/Complainant Counsel for the Appellant/Opp.Party : Party-In-Person Counsel for the Respondent/Complainant: Sri V. Srihari QUORAM:

HON’BLE SMT.MEENA RAMANATHAN…IN-CHARGE PRESIDENT &

HON’BLE SRI V.V.SESHUBABU, MEMBER-JUDICIAL FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FI RST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND TWENTY FIVE *******

Order : (Per Smt.Meena Ramanathan, Hon’ble In-charge President)

1. This is an appeal filed by the Appellant/Opposite Party U/s.41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, praying this Commission set aside the order of the District Consumer Forum, Medak at Sangareddy dated 11.03.2020 passed in CC.No.21 of 2019 and pass such other order or orders as this Commission may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and in the circumstances of the case.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as arrayed in the complaint. The Appellant is the Opposite Party and the Respondent is the Complainant in CC.No.21/2019.

3. Briefly stated, the facts are that – the Complainant, a retired Government teacher is an account holder in Opposite Party Bank bearing A/c.No.52125989074 for the past few years during his service. He availed a housing loan and the Opposite Party disbursed a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- on 19.03.2015, a sum of Rs.2,37,500/- was disbursed on 23.12.2015 and a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- was disbursed on 27.09.2016 according to the construction work. On 13.04.2015, a sum of Rs.8,100/- was deducted from the Complainant’s Savings Bank A/c. Thereafter, the EMI amount was changed from Rs.8,100/- to Rs.11,800/- and then to Rs.21,800/-.

4. The EMI was regularly auto-debited from 30.04.2015 to 31.01.2018 the Complainant’s Savings account to his home loan account without any failed transactions. From February, 2018, auto debit of EMI of Rs.21,800/- was not deducted from his Savings Bank Account and the Complainant visited the bank on several occasions on different dates requesting them to rectify the auto debit error, but the Opposite Party failed to take any action for the same. Further, the auto debit of EMI was not done and the Opposite Party regularly deducted the interest component from the Complainant’s saving bank account. The following table shows the interest levied on different dates:

Sl.No. Date Interest amount levied

1. 28.02.2018 Rs.9,213/- 2. 31.03.2018 Rs.10,194/-

5. The Complainant made several representations with the Opposite Party, but in vain. Vexed with their obduracy, the Complainant sent a legal notice and also made a complaint to the Banking Ombudsmen on 05.03.2019, as a result of which the Complainant received a call from the Opposite Party requesting the Complainant not to file such complaint as their reputation gets damaged. The acts of the Opposite Party not only amounts to deficiency in service but also unfair trade practice. Hence, the complaint.

6. The Opposite Party filed their written version stating that the Bank has granted a housing loan of Rs.20,00,000/- to the Complainant. The loan amount shall be repaid in equated monthly instalments of Rs.21,800/- commencing from 30.09.2016. The instalment amount can be changed based on the amount withdrawn. The Opposite Party has taken mandate for auto debit of monthly instalment from the Complainant’s savings account to the loan account, but the same was not done due to technical error in the month of February and March, 2018 and it was done manually.

7. The problem of auto debit was rectif