SHAUNAK H.SAYTA Vs. HDFC BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of order/award dated 14/7/2008 passed in consumer complaint no.4/2007 Mr.Shaunak H. Sayta v/s. HDFC Bank Ltd. by Central Mumbai District Consumer Forum. Complaint stood dismissed and feeling aggrieved thereby, original complainant has filed this appeal.

(2.) Appellant/complainant had taken a loan of Rs.2 lakhs in the month of September 2005 from respondent/original opponent bank (herein after referred as Bank for brevity). Appellant made an application for top up loan, which was sanctioned to him in the month of July 2006. Accordingly, Rs.1,60,524/- from the sanctioned top up loan were adjusted towards foreclosure/satisfaction of the first loan and balance of Rs.38,486/- were remitted to the complainant. Said remittance was refused by the complainant. Complainant informed bank that he did not agree with the conditions of top up loan. A Correspondence followed. Bank informed as per its letter dated 23/11/2006 to the complainant that since the complainant refused to accept the disbursement cheque of top up loan of Rs.38,486/-, supra, it has been agreed to reinstate the original loan and the process of reinstatement of the original loan was already explained to the complainant and the matter is held up due to refusal on the part of complainant to provide fresh set of documents/repayment instructions and insistence on part of the complainant to compensate him by the bank. The complainant was advised to contact the bank i.e. official Mr.Prashant Aldangadi of Retail Loans division. Thereafter complainant noticed that EMI towards the installment was wrongly debited in his account and thereafter he filed consumer complaint inter-alia praying following reliefs:-

(3.) Bank appeared and resisted the claim as per their written statement and denied the claim in toto. It is submitted on behalf of the bank that the second loan was disbursed as per the application of the complainant, but subsequently after the disbursement of the amount of Top up loan as per the agreed terms and conditions, the complainant returned the cheque of disbursement. There is no deficiency of service on their part and complaint deserves to be dismissed. Forum below upholding the contention of the bank dismissed the complaint.