Orissa

Sambalpur

CC/63/2021

Mst. Kalpana Sahu - Complainant(s)

Versus

1.State Bank of India, Hirakud Branch - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. R.P. Nanda & other Advocate

25 Apr 2023

ORDER

PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.- 63/2021

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member

 

Mst. Kalpana Sahu,

W/o- Late Kanhu Sahu,

R/o- New Market Hirakud, PO/PS-Hirakud,

Dist-Sambalpur-768016, Odisha                                   ...………..Complainant

 

                                                Versus

 

1. State Bank of  India, Hirakud Branch

Represented Through the Branch Manager

Po/Ps-Hirakud Dist-Sambalpur-768016, Odisha                      

2. The Chairman, State Bank Of India,

Rigved Cooperative Society,

Veer Savarkar Marg, Dadar, Mumbai

Mumbai-400028                                                       …………...Opp.Party

 

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant         :-       Sri. R.P.Nanda, Advocate & Associates
2. For the O.P.1 & 2               :-      Sri. A.K.Das

 

Date of Filing:10.11.2021,  Date of Hearing :14.03.2023  Date of Judgement : 25.04.2023

Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President.

 

1.       The case of the complainant is that the complainant is the widow of Kanhu Sahu and received Rs.7.00000/- towards L.I.C benefits in her S.B.A/C No.40401669944 IFSC Code SBIN0010256. On 18.9.2021 the complainant deposited SBI cheque No.766423 Dtd.18.9.2021 for Rs.6,40,000/- in her Hirakud U.Co.Bank A/C.No.02850100009682 which was dishonored by O.P.No.1 on 22.9.2021 with “funds insufficient “ although S.B. Account balance in O.P.No.1 Bank was Rs.6,50,730/-, on the date of processing 22.9.2021. After updating the pass book the complainant set hold Rs.7.00 Lakhs on her account without any reason and dishonored the cheque.

The complainant received a demand notice from O.P.No.1 dated 28.9.2021 that her husband availed a loan of Rs.6.00 Lakhs under the Banks Express credit loan scheme on 3.12.20220 vide A/C No.39843397168 with outstanding of Rs.5,93,424/- on dtd.28.9.2021. Though set off outstanding loan by Kanhu Sahu it was exercised. The complainant sent a registered letter dated 11.10.2021 to O.P.No.1 to supply copy of loan agreement. The O.P.No.`1 contended that exercising right to set off “ Terminal Benefits “ of Kanhu Sahu from L.I.C Policy amounting to Rs.7.00 Lakhs can be adjusted in the loan account . The complainant is neither a “borrower” nor a “guarantor “in the loan account. The attachment of the amount is illegal and arbitrary. The dishonor of the cheque dated 22.9.2021 is also against the procedure of law, breach of trust and misappropriation. The acts of the Opp. Parties amount to deficiency of service.

2.       The Opp. Parties in their version submitted that Kanhu Sahu had available a housing loan from the O.P.No.1 who died without repaying the loan amount. The policy maturity amount which was credited to the account of the complainant was the sole amount of the borrower. After death of the borrower to repay the loan amount being the legal heir of the deceased. As the complainant wife is enjoying and possessing the house constructed by the deceased borrower she can not escape from her liability. The liability shifted to legal heirs if any.

As per Bank Rules the account of complainant has been set hold. On 28.9.2021 a demand notice has been issued. The loan agreement has not been provided to the complainant. This is a case of adjustment of loan. It is true that the complainant is neither a borrower nor a guarantor. If the policy amount of the deceased borrower would release in favour of the complainant then the outstanding loan amount for construction of house would be remain unpaid as the public money involved in shape of loan. Due to current outstanding of loan of her husband the Bank was forced to hold the account. There is no deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opp.Parties. The action of the O.p.Bank is as per guidelines of R.B.I. The action of the Bank is on good faith.

3.       Perused the documents filed by the complainant (Xerox copies)

Annexure 1:                   Copy of SBI Account No.40401669944 of the complainant.

Annexure 2:                   SBI Cheque No.766423 dated 18.9.2021 for Rs.6,40,000/-

Annexure 3:                   Deposit Slip of Cheque No.766423 Dtd.18.9.2021.

Annexure 4 :                  Endorsements of insufficient fund dtd.23.9.2021.

Annexure 5:                   Demand notice dtd.28.9.2021 addressed to the complainant.

Annexure 6 :                  Reply dated 11.10.2021 of the complainant report.

Annexure 7 :                  Track consignment report consignment No.RO 002030739 IN.

Annexure 8 :                  Regd. letter dated 22.11.2021 of the O.P.No.1.

Annexure 9 :                  Copy of personal Agreement dated 3.12.2020 executed by Kanhu Sahu.

    4.       After perusal of the complaint, version of the Opp.Parties and documents filed by the parties the following observations are made.

I)       Deceased Kanhu Sahu has availed a personal loan i.e. Xpress Credit from the O.Ps for an amount of Rs.4,50,000/- with 13% interest P.A and agreed to repay the loan within 72 months with E.M.I Rs.9034.00, executed the agreement on 18.1.2020. Again the said loan was enhanced to Rs.6,00,000/- on 3.12.2020 and EMI rephrased Rs.11,606/- with 72 installments. There was no any collateral security of property. Further it is the admission of the Opp.Parties that the complainant wife of the borrower was not a co-borrower nor a guarantor to the loan account.

II)      As per account statement of the complainant on 8.9.2021 an amount of Rs.7.00 lakhs was set hold by the O.P.No.1 in S.B.A/C No.40401669944 IFSC SBIN 0010256 Hirakud Branch. Letter dated 28,9,2921 was issued by  the O.p.No.1 intimating outstanding amount of Rs.5,93,924/- against Kanhu Sahu      as on 28.9.2021. The terminal benefits received by legal heirs of deceased Kanhu  Sahu to be received by legal heirs of deceased Kanhu Sahu to be recovered against outstanding loan by exercising right  to set off towards  full repayment, expressing the said facts O.P. No.1 demanded the outstanding amount. As per reply of the complainant till 28.9.2021, she had no information from O.P.No.1 about the loan account of deceased Kanhu Sahu.

III)     The complainant when deposited cheque No.766423 dated 18.9.2021 for Rs.6,40,000/- in her U.Co.Bank A/C No.02850100009682 on dtd.22.9.2021 came to know about the “Funds insufficient” although balance in S.B.I A/C was Rs.6,50,730/- . After updating the pass book came to know about the “Set hold” for Rs.7.00 Lakhs. This is the cause of filing the complaint before this commission.

IV)    As per statement of the complainant Kanhu Sahu died on 09.06.2021 due to Corona Pandemic. The parties have not filed any Death Certificate nor legal heirs of the deceased Kanhu Sahu. The statement of the O.Ps are that loan granted to a borrower is custodian of the property. On 8.9.2021 account of the complainant was set hold for Rs. 7.00 lakhs and on what basis it has not been explained by the Opp.Parties. The complainant is an account holder of the Opp.Parties and after due procedure the account should have been set hold by the Opp.Parties giving an opportunity to defend. The O.Ps failed to file any documents to show that  before set hold the account of complainant, due notice was given . The O.Ps became alert when the cheque was dishonor on dtd.22.9.2021. Immediately thereafter demand notice was sent to the complainant intimating the loan account of the deceased Kanhu Sahu . It is established that the O.Ps have not followed due procedure setting hold account of the complainant.

        5.     The learned advocate for O.Ps Sri Das submitted that loan outstanding can be recovered from the legal heirs of the deceased otherwise public money will be at a stake. Further submitted that the loan agreement covers the heirs of the executants/borrower.The dispute is purely civil in nature. There is no deficiency on the part of the O.Ps and in public interest amount has been set hold.

                             In reply learned advocate for complainant Mr.Nanda agitated that only after dishonor of cheque the set hold action of the Opp.Parties and behind the back the account has been set hold. It amounts to deficiency in service.

                 6.              After observation the following issues are framed.

                                                              ISSUES

1. Whether the dispute between the parties are civil in nature and not maintainable before this Commission ?
2. Are the Opp.Parties deficienct in their service ?
3. What relief the complainant is entitled to get.

ISSUE NO.1 & 2 Whether the dispute between the parties are civil in nature and not maintainable before this Commission ?

&

Are the Opp.Parties deficienct in their service ?

                        When a borrower dies it is the duty of the financier/ Bank to take appropriate measures to secure the loan by impleading legal heirs of the deceased to the dispute by issuing demand notice or handing over the loan amount to the legal heirs over the loan amount. The Opp.Parties contention is true that it is purely Civil in nature. But action of the Opp.Parties without following due procedures, with holding Rs.7.00 Lakhs it amounts to deficiency in service. Here question arises as per demand notice dated 28.9.2021 the outstanding was Rs.5,93,924/- with interest.  The Opp.Party why not provided account statement before this commission nor supplied to the Opp.Parties and whimsically set hold the account of the complainant and made the case complicated taking laws into their hand? No doubt the Opp. Parties bank has the duty to protect the interest of the Bank and secure the debt but without following due procedure with held the payment of the complainant, it  amounts to deficiency in service.

                             Accordingly, this complaint is maintainable and the Opp.Parties are liable for deficiency in their service.

                             It is nevertheless to mention that the complainant filed petition for interim arrangement and this Commission directed the Opp.Parties to allow withdrawal of Rs.57,859/- but the O.Ps violated the order dtd.23.11.2021 of the Commission. As a result Execution Case No.2/22 was filed by the complainant on 25.4.2022. The Opp.Parties failed to file show cause and the O.P.No,.1 namely Lopamudra Patel W/O. Tanaya Patel Manager of the O.P.No.1 executed a bond and allowed to deferred  the       case, On  17.5.2022 order was passed to tag the case  with C.C.Case No.63/2021 for consideration. The Opp.Parties violated the order of this Commission by not allowing the complainant to withdraw Rs.57,859/- from her account.

                                      The practice of the O.P.No.1 is whimsical, without following due procedures and accordingly the O.P.No.1 is liable for action.

ISSUE NO.3 What relief the complainant is entitled to get.

                                        From the supra discussion it is clear that the complainant is entitled for relief:

Accordingly, it is ordered that:

                                                     ORDER.

                                       The complaint is allowed on contest against the Opp.Parties. The O.P.No.1 by not following due procedure set hold the account of the complainant and accordingly directed to set free the S.B.Account No. 40401669944 with immediate effect for operation . The O.Ps are at liberty to recover the outstanding dues of deceased Kanhu Sahu following due procedure before the Civil Court. For deficiency in service the O,.P.No.1 is directed to pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- within one month of this order. The O.P.No.2 is directed to initiate disciplinary action against the O.P;.No.1 for violation of order of this commission . Further for violation of order of this Commission the O.P.No.1 is to pay fine of Rs.50,000/- to the Consumer Welfare Fund of the State along with litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant.

                                       Order pronounced in the open court on 25^th April, 2023.

                                       Supply free copies to the parties.