STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KERALA FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/32/A/435/2017 ICICI BANK LTD PRESENT ADDRESS - RACE COURCE CIRCLE, VADODARA, GUJARATH- 390007 ,KERALA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus AJITH KUMAR N PRESENT ADDRESS - 34/1211-B, PALAZHIYIL HOUSE, EDAPPALLY P O, COCHIN- 682024 ,KERALA.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. SRI.AJITH KUMAR.D , JUDICIAL MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

ICICI BANK LTD, SUJA MADHAV (Advocate)

FOR THE RESPONDENT:

AJITH KUMAR N DATED: 15/01/2025

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL No.435/2017 REVIEWED JUDGEMENT DATED :15.01.2025 (As per order in M.A.No.06/2025 dated 07.08.2025)

(Against the order in C.C.No.879/2014 on the file of DCDRC, Ernakulam)

PRESENT:

SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER SRI. K.R. RADHAKRISHNAN : MEMBER APPELLANTS:

1. ICICI Bank having its Registered Office at Landmark, Race Course Circle, Vadodara, Gujarat – 390 007 rd

2. ICICI Bank Ltd., M.G. Road Branch, 3 Floor, M.G. Square, Opposite Padma Theatre, Kochi – 682 035

3. ICICI Home Finance Ltd. represented by its duly constituted Attorney, ICICI Bank having its Registered Office at Landmark, Race Course Circle, Vadodara, Gujarat – 390 007

4. ICICI Bank, B.M. Complex, Edapalli, Kochi – 682 024 (by Advs. Lal K. Joseph & Suja Madhav)

Vs.

RESPONDENTS:

1. Ajith Kumar N., S/o Narayanan Kurup, 34/1211-B, Palzhiyil House, Edappally P.O., Cochin – 682 024

2. Shiny Ajith Kumar, W/o Ajith Kumar N., 34/1211-B, Palzhiyil House, Edappally P.O., Cochin – 682 024 (bySr. Adv.ShyamPadman&Adv. Boby M. Sekhar)

JUDGEMENT

SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the opposite parties in C.C.No.879/2014 on the files of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam (the District Commission for short).

2. On 30.03.2017 the complaint filed by the respondents was allowed by the District Commission and directed the opposite parties to pay the complainants compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs only) along with interest @12% from the date of filing the complaint, to refund Rs.2,99,446/-(Rupees Two Lakhs Ninety Nine Thousand Four Hundred and Forty Six only) towards the excess amount of interest collected from the complainants, to pay Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) towards reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the complainant for filing home loan from another financial company and to pay Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) as costs of the proceedings.

3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, this appeal has been filed.

4. The brief facts contained in the complaint is that the complainants 1 and 2 had proposed to purchase a flat for a total construction costs of Rs.67,98,820/-(Rupees Sixty Seven Lakhs Ninety Eight Thousand Eight Hundred and Twenty only). The complainants had availed a housing loan for Rs.48,50,000/-(Rupees Forty Eight Lakhs Fifty Thousand st only) from the 1 opposite party and the total loan amount was disbursed to the complainant on 17.08.2010. An amount of Rs.3.5 lakhs was adjusted from the loan amount towards the loan insurance. The effective interest was fixed as 8.25% and EMI as 180 months @Rs.47,052/-(Rupees Forty Seven Thousand and Fifty Two only).

4. The opposite parties 1 and 2 were regularly debiting the EMIs from the current account of the complainants which stands in the name of their firm as M/s Akshay Agencies in the Union Bank of India, Thevara Branch. In 2013 when the statement of accounts of the housing loan was verified for the purpose of submitting the income tax returns, the Chartered Accountant found that the number of repayment instalment was raised to 328 as against 180.

st nd The complainants had pointed out the mistake to the 1 and 2 opposite parties and requested for a copy of the statement of accounts including the repayment schedule so as to ascertain the actual amount payable by the complainants. At that point of time the complainants came to know that the opposite parties had unilaterally increased t