3

3. The R3 filed a counter adopted by R1 and R2 with a memo admitting that

the complaint filed against the respondents is not come under the purview of

Consumer Protection Act on the sole ground, the complaint to be dismissed in

limine. The respondents has sanctioned and disbursed the loans as mentioned in

the complaint to the complainant and providing details of the loans availed by the

complainant.

S.No. Loan No. Purpose D a t e o f

disbursement

Amount

disbursement.

1. N 13 Submergible

motor

1-7-1998 Rs. 28,500/-

2. N.5 Citrus 1-7-1998 Rs. 12,000/-

3. N.B.147 Sheep 18-5-2006 Rs. 40,000/-

4. S.T. Loan 177 Crop Loan 3-4-2007 Rs. 10,000/-

Total Rs. 90,500/-

The complainant has been paying his loan installments every year regularly for the

entire above loan except loan No. 5 citrus. He fell due on 01-3-2004 for the

installment to the loan No. 5 citrus to the tune of Rs. 1,980/-. On such over due

amount of Rs. 27/- and Rs. 5/- were levied towards interest and penal interest

totaling it as Rs. 2,012/- and also two years moratorium interest of Rs. 503/- was

also levied and due amount reached to Rs. 2,515/-. The rescheduled amount of

Rs. 2,515/- has to be repaid in three yearly installments, each installment amount of

Rs. 1,056/-. The complainant repaid only one installment due on 1-3-2007 and the

remaining two installments are pending. As per Andhra Pradesh State Cooperative

Bank Ltd., Hyderabad circular No. UB/ADV/Sectt/F 290, dt. 30-5-2008, the

reschedule balance amount was waived under debt relief scheme, the rescheduled

balance amount of Rs. 1612/- was waived by the government and the same amount

was adjusted to his loan No. R.s. 6, dt. 30-6-2008.

4

4. The incentive payment of Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant, it is submitted

that as per APSC bank Circular No. ADV/Sectt/F 293/2008-09, dt. 2-9-2008, the

borrowers are not entitled for this incentive in case, they already got benefit under

the ADWDRS (debt Waiver Scheme) 2008. As the complainant already got

Rs. 1,612/- under Debt Relief Scheme, he is not entitled for incentive amount of

Rs. 5,000/-. The complainant was a defaulter and thereby caused mental agony to

the respondents.

5. On behalf of the complainant Ex. A1 to A5 were marked and on behalf of

the respondents Ex. B1 to B4 were marked.

6. On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for

determination.

i. Whether the complainant is entitled to receive compensation

towards mental agony from the respondents?

ii. Whether there is any negligence and deficiency of service on the

part of the respondents?

iii. To what relief?

7. Point No. 1 & 2 Heard both sides and perused the records available

with the forum and the forum made the following order. The complainant is the

resident of Yellamarajupalli village, Nandalur Mandal, now residing at

Kothamadhavaram, Ontimitta Mandal, Kadapa District. The complainant is having

Ac. 3.56 cents of lands in different survey Nos. 24/1 Ac. 1.29 cents, 24/2 Ac. 1.29

cents, 17/2 Ac. 0.39 ½ cents, 18 Ac. 0.25 cents, 146/2 Ac. 0.34 cents totaling Ac.

3.56 cents. He joined as a member in R2 bank by paying Rs. 4,050/- in the year

1998. After that he took loan of Rs. 28,500/- towards motor, Rs. 12,000/- towards

citrus trees totaling Rs. 40,500/- and he was paying the interest and loan amount

regularly as demanded by the respondents. Ex. A1 is the demand notice, dt.

5-12-2007. Ex. A2 is the demand notice issued by R2. Ex. A3 is the representation

letter dt. 24-11-2008 made by the complainant to R1. Ex. A4 is three postal

5

acknowledgement cards and Ex. A5 is the Xerox copy of pattadar passbook belongs

to the complainant. The complainant took another loan of Rs. 40,000/- to purchase

sheep in the year 2007. The respondents collected only interest towards the said

loan. Prior in the year 2006 he took Rs. 10,000/- towards crop loan for which also

the respondents are collected only interest and the principal was retained as it is.

The complainant stated that he was paying the installments regularly to the

respondents as demanded by them and he is a defaulter. While so in the year 2008

he has received a demand notice from R1 that he has to pay Rs. 15,871/- on or

before 01-3-2008 which is marked as Ex. A1.

8. In the month of February the government has declared that all the

Agricultural loans were waived. So he has not paid the above said amount. When he

enquired with the respondents they stated that he was paying the installments

regularly so he was not come under the said scheme. But turn they stated that he

received Rs. 5,000/- of incentive. But on 7-7-2008 he received a copy of signatures

of the Secretary which is marked as Ex. A2 that Rs. 1,612/- were waived with the

respondents that when he has paying that the installments regularly as demanded by

the respondents how he has not entitled for Rs. 1,612/- only. Why he has not getting

Rs. 5,000/- as incentive. The complainant represented the matter to R1 which is

marked as Ex. A3 and he has sent the copies all the respondents and postal

acknowledgements were marked as Ex. A4. The respondents in their counter stated

that the allegations made by the complainant are false and untenable and the

present case will not come under the purview of C.P. Act. The respondents further

stated that they have waived and distributed loans to the complainant he was paying

the installments regularly for the entire loan except loan No. 5 citrus trees. He fell

due for the installments to the loan No. 5 citrus to the tune of Rs. 1,980/- on such

over due to amount of Rs. 27/- and Rs. 5/- were levied towards interest totaling

Rs. 2,012/- and also two years moratorium interest of Rs. 503/- were also levied and

due amount reached 2,515/-. For which has paid Rs. 1,056/- and the balance was

6

waived by the respondents under Cir. No. UB/ADV/Sectt/F 290, dt. 30-5-2008, the

rescheduled balance amount was waived under debit relief scheme, regarding the

payment of incentive of Rs. 5,000/-. The borrowers are not entitled for this incentive

in case, they already got benefit under the ADWDRS debit Waiver scheme 2008. As

such the complainant is not entitled for any incentive as stated by him. Ex. B1 is the

Xerox copy of shadow ledger of R2. Ex. B2 is the Xerox copy of letter issued by

Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Agriculture, dt. 15-11-2008. Ex. B3

is the Xerox copy of G.O No. 297, dt. 14-11-2008 and Ex. B4 is the Xerox copy of

letter issued by the Andhra Pradesh State Co-operative Bank Ltd., By seeing Ex. B2

and B3 it is clear that providing an incentive of Rs. 5,000/-. The actual amount

repaid whichever is a loan to the farmers, who availed crop loan from Kharif 2004

onwards and repaid the loan by 20-9-2008 and not benefit under the Government of

India Agricultural debt waived and debt relief scheme 2008. Farmers gets a single

incentive, irrespective the number of accounts he or she operates. Not only that the

above said consumer dispute with regarding to the loan waiving and moratorium has

not come under the purview of C.P. Act. This is not an appropriate forum to discuss

the above said issue. The complainant is not a consumer and the present complaint

is dismissed. We are of the opinion that the present complaint does not attract the

C.P. Act and this is not an appropriate forum to discuss the matter and approach the

appropriate forum for adjudicate.

9. Point No. 3 In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs

directing the complainant to approach any appropriate civil forum for proper relief, is

so advised.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced

by us in the open forum, this the 30

MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT

7

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined.

For Complainant : NIL For Respondent : NIL

Exhibits marked for Complainant : -

Ex. A1 Demand notice issued by R1, dt. 5-12-2007.

Ex. A2 Agriculture loan waive and loan rebate 2008 issued by R1.

Ex. A3 Representation letter from complainant to R1, dt. 24-11-2008.

Ex. A4 Three postal acknowledgement cards.

Ex. A5 X/c of pattadar passbook.

Exhibits marked for Respondents: -

Ex. B1 X/c of shadow ledger issued by R1.

Ex. B2 X/c of letter from Commissioner & Director of Agriculture A.P.

Hyderabad to the Convener, SLBC of A.P. Hyderabad, dt. 15-11-2008.

Ex. B3 X/c of G.O.Ms. No. 297, dt. 14-11-2008.

Ex. B4 X/c of letter from the A.P.State Cooperative Bank Ltd., to all the General

Managers, DDDBanks, dt. 2-9-2008.

MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT

Copy to :-

1) Sri C. Subba Reddy, Advocate,

2) Sri D. Nageswara Raju, Advocate.

1) Copy was made ready on :

2) Copy was dispatched on :

3) Copy of delivered to parties :

B.V.P. - - -