West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/70/2016

Dolan Jana - Complainant(s)

Versus

Allahabad Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Susanta Kumar Jana

24 May 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

                             

Bibekananda Pramanik, President,

and

Sagarika Sarkar, Member

   

Complaint Case No.70/2017

 

Dolan Jana, D/o-Chandan Kumar Jana, Vill-San Moninathpur,

P.O.-Sankoa & P.S.-Kharaqgpur (L),

Dist-Paschim Medinipur…..….………Complainant

Versus

                         Allahabad Bank, Tapan Santra, Branch Manager, Sankoa Branch,

             P.O.-Sankoa, P.S.-Kharagpur (L),

    Dist-Paschim Medinipur.………....…Opposite. Party.

 

 For the Complainant:  Mr. Susanta Kumar Jana, Advocate.

For the O.P.              :  Mr. Mrinal Mukhopadhyay, Advocate.     

 

Decided on: - 24/05/2017

                               

ORDER

                         Sagarika Sarkar, Member – The instant case is filed u/s-12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 by Miss. Dolon Jana alleging  deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.-Bank.

                 The case of the complainant, in brief, is that the complainant is the A/c holder of Allahabad Bank and she applied for educational loan being no.1238 at the O.P. Branch at Sankoa, Kharagpur, Dist-Pashcim Medinipur, for the amount of Rs.4,00,000/-. It is stated from the petition of complaint that the Branch Manager of the O.P.-Bank accepted the said application and called her with her father at his office for  

Contd………..P/2

                                                                                  

                                          ( 2 )

conversation regarding the educational loan. It is further stated by the complainant that while the discussion was going on the O.P.-Branch Manager passed very discouraging comments to the complainant and her father. It is specifically alleged by the complainant that the O.P.-Branch manager did not sanction the said loan and also enlisted her name in CIBIL though she did not avail any loan at all from any financial institution. According to the complainant these acts on the part of the O.P. are examples of deficiency in service. Hence she has filed this consumer complaint praying for direction upon the O.P. to grant educational loan of Rs.4,00,000/-, to pay Rs.90,000/- towards compensation to pay Rs.10,000/- towards the litigation cost and to withdraw her name from CIBIL.

             Notice was duly served upon the O.P. The O.P. has contested this case by filing written version, denying all the allegations made against them stating, interalia, that  that father of the complainant Sri Chandan Kumar Jana availed bank loan and defaulted in making payment of the same, father of the said Chandan Kumar Jana also availed loan and defaulted in repaying the said loan. Three brothers of Chandan Jana also availed loans but did not repay the same and considering all these aspect, the O.P. refused to sanction the educational loan to the complainant.

             Complainant adduced evidence on affidavit followed by cross-examination.

             O.P. also adduced evidence on affidavit followed by cross-examination.

Points for decisions :

1.Whether the case is maintainable in its present form ?

2.Whether  there is deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. ?

3.Whether  the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?

  

Decisions :

        For the sake of convenience and brevity all the above points are taken up together for consideration.

       It is evident from the petition of complaint that the complainant had applied for educational loan for perusing her MBA, at the Sankoa Branch of Allahabad Bank, for the amount of Rs.4,00,000/-. It is alleged that the O.P.-Branch Manager refused to sanction the loan. The main grievance of the complainant is that the O.P. did not sanction the said loan which constitutes the deficiency in service. In these respect the complainant has stated that the O.P.-Bank put her name in CIBIL so that it is     

Contd………..P/3

                                            

                                                                                          ( 3 )

difficult to get any loan from any financial institute. In course of hearing of the case Ld. Advocate for the complainant had submitted that the complainant is in need of the said loan and same may be disbursed by the order of this Forum. It is further stated by the Ld. Advocate of the complainant that the O.P.-Branch Manager refused to sanction the loan arbitrarily which is not permissible under the law. Ld. Advocate for the O.P. had submitted that it is the discretionary power vested with the bank that when and to whom any loan should be disbursed. Whether the bank was deficient in providing service by rejecting the loan application, we rely upon the decision of Hon’ble National Commission where is it has been held that it is the matter of sole discretion on the part of the Bank. Since, as per statutory provision the Bank has ample scope of application this discretion in respect of sanctioning loan with a view that the prospective borrower  shall stick to the terms of loan agreement and thus repay the loan amount, the bank has every right to reject any loan application.

              In such view of the matter we are of opinion that the O.P.-Bank by refusing the application made by the complainant caused no deficiency in service.

            However we find the O.P.-Bank enlisted the complainants name in CIBIL, though, neither she availed any loan from any financial institution nor did she default in making payment of any amount.  Regarding this matter we are of opinion that it was the unfair trade practice under section 2.1(r), adopted by the O.P.-Bank.  The O.P.-Bank should withdraw her name from CIBIL.

             In the result, the petition of complaint succeeds in part.

                                         Hence, it is

ORDERED

                                                         that the complaint case being no.70/2016 is allowed in part but considering the circumstances without cost.

              O.P. is directed to withdraw the name of the complainant from CIBIL within one month from this order.

              Let plain copy of order be given to the parties free of cost.

               Dictated and Corrected by me

                        Sd/- S. Sarkar                                                            Sd/-B. Pramanik.

                          Member                                                                        President

                                                                                                           District Forum

                                                                                                        Paschim Medinipur