HDFC BANK LIMITED Vs. SHARMILA DAS GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this Revision Petition, under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"), is to the order dated 05.02.2013, passed by the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Kolkata (for short "the State Commission") in First Appeal No. 63 of 2012. By the impugned order, the State Commission has affirmed the order dated 08.12.2011, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit-1, Kolkata (for short "the District Forum") in Complaint Case No. 40 of 2008, and consequently dismissed the Appeal, preferred by the Revision Petitioner herein, namely, HDFC Bank Ltd.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the Revision Petitioner is referred to as the Bank and the Respondent as the Complainant.

(3.) The facts, material to the case, are that the Complainant had taken a gold loan amounting to Rs. 48,000/- against deposit of 113 grams of gold ornaments from the Bank. The maturity period of the said loan account was 05.05.2007. It was averred that due to her weak financial condition and also owing to heavy rainfall, she had failed to deposit the necessary EMIs as fixed. It was pleaded that as per advice of the Bank, on 07.07.2007, the Complainant deposited a sum of Rs. 1,500/- with the Bank and was further advised to pay the rest of the amount as early as possible, so that her loan account could be renewed automatically. It was further averred that on 10.08.2007 she had received a letter, along with a banker's cheque for an amount of Rs. 10,024.79 ps., stating that this was the balance amount, which was due to the Complainant, after having sold the gold deposited, and adjusting the loan amount. It was pleaded that the act of the Bank in selling the gold without issuing any notice prior to sale was an unfair trade practice adopted by the Bank.