Orissa

Jajapur

CC/17/2017

Krishana Kumar Singh. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager ICICI Bank Duburi Branch. - Opp.Party(s)

Srikanta Mohapatra,Seetikanta Das

29 Sep 2018

ORDER

IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.

                                                        Present:      1.Shri Jiban ballav Das , President

                                                                            2.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,

                                                                            3.Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.                                                                    

                                             Dated the 29th day of September,2018.

                                                      C.C.Case No.17 of 2017

Krishna kumar Singh  , S/O Late Lalwan Singh  

Vill. Gourah  , P.O. Bairagal ,

P.S. Dubulia Bazar , Dist.-Basti

At Present

Working as operater,At.Sterling Managerment

& Security Services (p) Ltd,

Jindal Stainless Ltd, Kalinga Nagar,Jajpur Road, Dt.Jajpur .

                                                                                                                              ……....Complainant .                                                                   .                                     

                                                  (Versus)

1.Branch Manager,I.C.I.C.I Bank, Duburi Branch,Bank street,Jajpur Road

At/P.O.Jajpur Road,Dt.Jajpur .

2.Branch Manager,Axis bank ,Bhubaneswar RAC,At/P.O.Sahid Nagar

Bhubneswar, Dt.Khurda.

                                                                                                                          ……………..Opp.Parties.                  

                                                                                                                            

For the Complainant:                            Sri S.Mohapatra, Sri S.Das, Advocates.

For the Opp.Parties : No.1 and 2           Sri L. Nayak, Sri P.K.Mohapatra, Advocates.

 

                                                                                                               Date of order:   29.09.2018.

SHRI JIBAN BALLAV  DAS, PRESIDENT .

Deficiency in banking service is the grievance of the petitioner

                The fact relevant  shortly  as per complaint petition is that the petitioner  earlier  has availed a personal loan from the O.P.no.2 with ROI @ 18.5%  vide loan A/C No.PPR002401429431  for  an amount of Rs one lakh . Thereafter the O.P.no.1 approached the petitioner through bank Executive Mr. Ratikanta ojha to  transfer  the personal loan to O.P.no.1 with lower  ROI  at the rate of 11.99%  and accordingly the petitioner  gave his consent and did the needful as per the instruction of O.P.no.1 .  That the  petitioner downloaded  the  o.p.no.1 ( ICICI ) with ID- 67007270  and found that  ROI  as Rs. 13.75 and then the petitioner  intimated the O.P.no.1 through their Bank executive Mr. Ratiknata ojha , relation  of  Debasish  parida who assured the petitioner  that the ROI  will be rectified as soon as the loan amount will be disbursed. The O.P.no.1 sanctioned the loan vide loan A/C No.LPD0000035062745 with ROI @ 17.99%  for amounting  Rs.1,95,000/-   (65,602/-)  for O.P.no.2 and intimated the loan of Rs.1,30,000/-   and  the petitioner   became puzzled and intimated all the authority of O.P.no.1  for high ROI  . There after got the direction from  higher authority to sanction the loan with  ROI   12.69%  .

                That till now the op.1 has not cleared the dues of op.2 and the petitioner  is giving EMI to  O.P.no..2  for same loan  and more over the O.P.no..2 has fixed the  ROI  at the rate of 13% violating the direction of higher authorities  as well as sanction excess loan of Rs 2 lakh  though it was decided Rs 1,95,000/-  for which the petitioner  has suffered irreparable loss by  O.P.no.1  for their deliberate negligence .

                That the petitioner has   stated that he is a service holder of Jindal stainless Ltd.  and a bonafied consumer of O.Ps   and he draws the salary from the Bank  of O.P.no.1  .Accordingly finding no other alternative the petitioner  knocked the door of this fora with the prayer    he may be compensated Rs.1,00,000/-  from O.P.no.1 for their deliberate negligence of service for which he has suffered financial loss .  

                Though  the notice was duly served on  the O.Ps  ,the O.P.no2  did not  contest the dispute . Hence he has been set expoarte vide order dt. 11.08.17.

 The O.P.no.1 appeared through their learned counsel and filed their written version taking the following stands:

Admittedly  In the year 2016 the complainant  had applied  to O.P.no.1 for external balance transfer (Exbit) of his personal loan with AXIS Bank .In this regard, the complainant was supposed to submit few documents before the O.p.no.1 enabling them to book the complainant’s case under EXBT personal loan. However ,the complainant did not provide relevant documents even after repeated reminders by O.P.no.1 for which the procedure of loan sanction and / or disburse was delayed. Finally though the complainant submitted loan account statement  / Track of AXIS bank but that was not up to date. Hence, the complainant’s application for personal loan was processed as a Fresh Personal Loan by O.P.no.1 and an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- at the rate of interest 17.99% P.A  was sanctioned for a tenure of 48 months and  said amount was disbursed on November-29,2016 vide loan A/C No.LPDUU00035062745 ,upon consent of complainant.  On January ,02 2017 the O.P.no.1 received a mail from the office of the Banking Ombudsman, Bhubaneswar wherein the complainant’s Mail was forwarded to O.P.no.1 for due analysis and redressal with regard to concerns raised by complainant pertaining to his personal Loan Account No.LPDUU00035062745. The complainant had basically alleged before the Banking Ombdusman that he has a loan of Rs.1 lakh @ 18.5% per annum rate of interest at Duburi Branch of AXIS Bank . But due to some reason, he wanted to transfer his loan to Duburi Branch of O.P.no.1 .As the process completed, he came to know that the o.P.no.1 has financed a fresh personal loan at the rate of 17.99% .In fact , the complainant was well aware about the terms and conditions of the said personal loan which was disbursed in his favour at the rate of 17.99%  interest per annum  and had given his consent by signing the loan agreement and other documents.

                On January,23 -2017 the O.p.no.1 received a letter from the complainant that he had withdrawn his complaint. The O.P.no.1 replied to complainant on January-27 ,2017 and clarified about his personal loan. Thereby the complainant was intimated about re-booking of the complainant loan account.

            In order to redress grievance of the complainant an application was need to be put forth by him once again for EXBT of his personal loan with AXIS Bank. Simultaneously the existing loan with O.P no.1 was to be closed by INBT and both the loans were converted to a single loan. Accordingly the complainant applied for financial assistance to O.P no.1 for the second time on January-30,2017 for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- vide application form No.PL004726686.

                That relying on the submission and documents furnished by the complainant ,O.p.no.1 agreed to sanction loan facility of Rs.2,00,000/- .The complainant signed credit facility application form and accepted standard terms and conditions for availing personal loan facility on February-16-2017 .As per terms of the loan facility said amount of Rs.2,00,000/- was disbursed vide loan A/C No.LPDUU00035359567 which is to be repaid by the complainant in 48 monthly installments of Rs.5,366/- each at fixed interest at the rate of 12.69% per annum. The complainant after having read and understood all the terms and conditions had duly signed credit facility application form.

                The loan was disbursed through EXBT and a cheque bearing No.306801 of Rs.65,602/- dt.23.02.17 issued in favour of AXIS Bank Ltd PPR002401429431 was also handed over to the complainant. The fact and circumstances of the case is  that the O>p.no.1 has never rendered any deficiency in service except  acting as per terms of the loan agreement. The complaint filed by the complainant before this Forum with an ill intention and by making false ,frivolous and misleading statements. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances , the proceeding against the O.p.no1 is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed .The O.p.no.1 is not at all in fault or be blamed for any deficiency in service on its part.

                On the date of hearing we heard the argument from the learned advocate  for the petitioner. After perusal of the record and documents in details we observed that :

1. It is undisputed facts that initially the petitioner availed a personal loan from op.2  with ROI  18.5% vide loan A/C  no.PPRO02401429431  for amount of Rs one lakh.

2 It is also undisputed fact that the complainant has  contracted with the executive of op.1 regarding less interest at the rate of 11.99%   on personal loan .  The petitioner agreed to transfer his salary account and personal loan account to  avail  the personal loan from O.P.no.1 with the condition the O.P.no.1  will repay  the loan amount of O.P.no.2 .

3. As per allegation of the petitioner after sanction of the loan by o.p1 he come to know that the ROI  17.99  has been  fixed by o.p.no.1 on  personal loan  and he alleged that fact before  the ombudsman on dt 27^th  January - 2017 .Thereafter as per  advice  of Banking ombudsman  the loan interest reduced from 17.99  to 12.99  .

                It is also alleged by the petitioner that the O.P.no.1 issued the   statement  of sanction  loan amount  of Rs. 1,97,000 /- with 48 installment with ROI  12.69 with EMI Rs. 5,255/ but in fact the O.P.no.1  sanctioned  loan of Rs.  2 lakh for EMI 5,266/-  with the consent of the petitioner . The O.P.no.1 is also taking higher charges of  EMI i.e Rs 5,366/- instead of Rs.5,334.80 with extra amount of Rs 32/-  per month .

                It is also alleged by the petitioner that the O.P.NO.1 credited  to  O.P.NO.2 Rs. 1,31,956/ though the balance outstanding of O.P.no.2 was  Rs. 1.27,217/-  .

                Further it is  alleged by the  petitioner  that the O.P.no.1 prepared the cheque was 23.02.17  and handed over  the  same  on  6/3/17 causing a loss  to petitioner that he has to pay loan interest to  both the O.P.no.1 and 2 .

                On the allegation above  as raised by the petitioner we do not found  in the written version the sufficient clarification from O.P.no.1. Accordingly we are inclined to hold that there is deficiency of service from the side of O.P.no.1.

Hence this order.

                The dispute is allowed against the O.P.1 .and dismissed against o.p2.  The o.pno.1 is directed to pay compensation of Rs 10,000/ -( ten thousand ) only  for monetary loss and mental agony and harassment to the petitioner  within one month after receipt  of this order, failing which the petitioner will take steps as per law.

            This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 29th  day of September,2018. under my hand and seal of the Forum.