DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR,
KOLKATA-700 0144
C.C. CASE NO. __69_ _ OF ___2018
DATE OF FILING :_6.6..2018 DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT:9.1.2019
Present : President : Ananta Kumar Kapri
Member(s) : Subrata Sarker & Jhunu Prasad
COMPLAINANT : Debasish Mondal, son of Monoranjan Mondal, C/o Nirmal Dey, Vill. Noapara, 3rd Lane, (Petkata Goli), P.O & P.S Sonarpur, Kolkata-150.
O.P/O.Ps : United Bank of India, Maheshtala Branch, Jalkhula Super Market Complex (1st Floor), Maheshtala, South 24-Parganas, Pin-743352.
__________________________________________________________________
J U D G M E N T
Sri Ananta Kumar Kapri, President
Despite full repayment of the loan amount, complete emancipation from liability of indebtedness has remained a distant dream to the complainant. The Bank has been demanding more and more amount beyond the terms of the agreement and, therefore, the complainant has filed the instant case under section 12 of the C.P Act, 1986 ,alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P Bank.
The facts leading to the filing of the instant case may be set forth as follows.
The complainant took a personal loan of Rs.3 lac from the O.P Bank and it was agreed between the parties that the complainant would repay the loan amount along with interest as agreed upon by 60 installments of Rs.5071/- each. The installments were completely repaid by the complainant. Still, the O.P Bank has refused to grant no objection certificate (NOC) to the complainant on the ground that the complainant is still liable to pay Rs.2,41,410/- to O.P Bank. The complainant has prayed for compensation for harassment and mental agony and also for expunge of his name from “CIBIL”( Credit Information Bureau (India) Ltd.) list. Hence, the instant case.
By filing written statement, it is contended by the O.P Bank , inter alia, that the loan of Rs.3 lac was granted to the complainant and he was directed to pay the entire loan amount in 60 monthly installments of Rs.7240/- each. But, due to bonafide mistake the installment amount was not properly mentioned in the sanction letter; it was mentioned as Rs.5071/- a month instead of Rs.7240/- a month. So, according to the submissions of the O.P Bank, the bank is still entitled to get Rs.2,41,410/- from the complainant and as the said amount has not been paid to the O.P Bank by the complainant, the NOC has not been issued in his favour.
Upon the averments of the parties, the following points are formulated for consideration.
POINT FOR DETERMINATION
- Is the O.P Bank guilty of deficiency in service as alleged by the complainant ?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief or reliefs as prayed for ?
EVIDENCE OF THE PARTIES
Complainant has filed a petition praying for acceptance of his petition of complaint as his evidence, vide his petition dated 13.9.2018. Similarly, the written statement filed by the O.P Bank is also treated as its evidence vide its petition dated 1.10.2018.
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point no.1 & 2 :
Already heard the submissions of Ld. Lawyers ,appearing for both the parties. Perused the petition of complaint, written statement and the documents on record. Considered the submissions advanced by Ld. Lawyer appearing for the O.P Bank and also the complainant himself.
It is true that a mistake is committed by the O.P Bank while drafting the sanction letter issued in favour of the complainant in respect of the loan granted to the complainant. In the sanction letter, it is mentioned that complainant will have to repay the loan by 60 monthly installments of Rs.5071/- each. It is submitted on behalf of the O.P Bank that the said installment should have been Rs.7240/- a month instead of Rs.5071/- a month and the said mistake was nothing but a clerical mistake committed by the staff of the Bank.
To commit a mistake is not a fault on the part of any one. There is no person born so far in the World, who has never committed any mistake. So, the O.P Bank cannot be blamed for commission of any mistake in so far as the installment amount of the loan taken by the complainant is concerned. Upon calculation, it is found that the complainant was liable to pay Rs.4,34,400/- in all, if the installment amount was Rs.7240/- a month. It also goes undisputed that the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.3,16,879/- to the O.P Bank. So, the complainant is found still liable to pay Rs.1,17,521/- to the O.P Bank and if this amount is paid by the complainant to the O.P Bank, the liability of the complainant will be entirely liquidated.
We have already mentioned that the O.P bank cannot be blamed for the mistake by a staff. Further, Ld. Lawyer appearing for the O.P Bank has also submitted that if the complainant pays Rs.1,17,521/- to the O.P Bank at a time, the Bank will issue NOC and the name of the complainant will also be cancelled from “CIBIL” list. The submission advanced by the Ld. Lawyer appearing for the Bank is entirely accepted and we pass the orders as follows.
In the result, the case succeeds .
Hence,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is decreed on contest against the O.P with a cost of Rs.5,000/-.
The O.P Bank is directed to issue No Objection Certificate (NOC) to the complainant and also to struck off his name from the “CIBIL” list within a period of 7 days of payment of Rs.1,17,521/- by the complainant to the O.P Bank.
If the O.P Bank fails to comply with the order of the Forum within the aforesaid period, the Bank will have to pay a compensation of Rs.30,000/- to the complainant and at the same time, the Bank will forfeit Rs.1,17,521/- to the complainant as referred to above.
Let a free copy of this order be given to the parties concerned at once.
President
I / We agree
Member
Dictated and corrected by me
President
