T H CHOWFIN Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This complaint is filed by the complainants against the opposite party State Bank of India claiming relief of Rs.12,25,000/- towards the loss of housing loan, for the deficiency in service of the opposite party with interest at 18 per cent per annum and also a sum of Rs.1.00 lakh towards compensation on account of mental torture and agony, inconvenience and harassment suffered by the complainants.

(2.) It has also been stated in the complaint, a complaint was filed before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission as Original Petition No.123 of 2002. In the course of hearing, it was realised that there were two separate causes for complaints. They were on account of two loans availed from State Bank of India Vasco Da Gama, (a) Housing Loan; (b) Educational Loan for financing the studies abroad of the complainant's daughter. The National Commission by its order dated 29.4.2002 permitted the complainants to withdraw that complaint and to approach the Goa State Commission for appropriate reliefs, after reducing the compensation amount. The present complaint has been filed relating to the housing loan availed.

(3.) The opposite party, State Bank of India resisted the complaint in the written version and raised the following preliminary objections. The complaint is not maintainable as there is no consumer-trader relationship between the complainants and opposite party. The opposite party has not charged any processing fee or service charges for considering the loan proposal of the complainants. As no service charges are collected for processing the loan proposal, the complainants cannot claim to be consumers. Further, the opposite party has alleged that they have filed recovery proceedings against the complainants for recovery of the outstandings of the housing loan as well as educational loan. The said proceedings are duly registered as O. A. No.74 of 2002 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal-III at Mumbai. Complainants have wilfully suppressed this material fact. The complainants have to raise their claim in their defence before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Mumbai and the present complaint is not maintainable.