This complaint petition has been filed by complainant Shreekant Kumar against Branch Manager, PNB Paru Branch, District-Muzaffarpur for realization of Rs. 5,00,000/- as claimed amount.
The brief, fact of the case is that PNB, Paru Branch sanctioned. Rs. 92,515 as educational loan in favour of complainant Shreekant Kumar for the regular educational session 2006-2008 for M.B.A course from Lalit Narayan Mithila University Darbhanga but only paid Rs.42,975/- in the whole M.B.A educational session. The further case is that o.p didn’t pay the rest loan amount on several request made by complainant so, he suffered with physical, economical and mental loss. The further case is that the o.p asked bribe money from the complainant to pay the rest amount.
The complainant has filed the following documents - photocopy of letter of Sanction Annexure -1, photocopy of receipts annexure-2, photocopy of page of passbook annexure-3, photocopy of fee payable for two years MBA course annexure-4, photocopy of cheques annexure-5, photocopy of application for information under RTI Act annexure-6-, photocopy of settled report preview, annexure-7, photocopy of legal notice annexure-8, photocopy of postal receipt annexure-09, photocopy of application for information under RTI annexure-10, photocopy of application of Sreekant Kr., to Branch Manager ,PNB, Paro for demand of Rs. 2815. Annexure-11, photocopy of Admission card of Sreekant Kr. Annexure-12, photocopy of application of Sree Kant Kr. to Kshetriya Manager, PNB, Divisional office Muz. Annexure-13, photocopy of free receipts annexure-14, photocopy of page of passbook of Saving A/C. annexure-15, photocopy of Admit card of Sreekant Kr. Annexure-16, photocopy of Income certificate of Shreekant kumar annexure-17, photocopy of application form for term loan for prosecuting higher education annexure-18, photocopy of agreement for education loan annexure-19, photocopy of letter of Guarantee annexure-20, photocopy of cutting of daily news Hindustan dated 13-11-2008 annexure-21, photocopy of statement of A/C from 10-12-2005 to 03-05-2008 of A/C 100379 annexure-22, photocopy of letter dated 12-09-2006 of North Bihar kshetriya bank Muzaffarpur annexure-23, photocopy of caste certificate annexure-24.
O.P appeared on 23-10-2009 and filed his w.s. on 05-01-2010 praying therein to dismiss the complaint petition with exemplary cost. Sanctioning of loan in favour of petitioner by the o.p to the tune of Rs. 92415/- for the educational session 2006 to 2008 is an admitted fact . It is also admitted that Rs. 42,975/- was only paid by the o.p to the petitioner on his demand. It has been mentioned in w.s. that no application or any demand is pending for disbursement. It has been further mentioned that the o.p had call upon the complainant on 30-09-2008 to submit the progress report and fee receipt for further action but the complainant never complied nor submitted the progress report and other documents for the disimbursment of the rest amount of the loan. It has been further mentioned in the w.s. that the petitioner has completed the course, so there is no need of further loan.
On behalf of o.p followings documents have been annexed – photocopy of reply of o.p. under the RTI Act annexure-A, photocopy of letter to call for progress report and fee receipt on dated 30-09-2008 annexure-B, photocopy of outstanding statement for the period from 10-12-2005 to 03-05-2008 annexure-C, photocopy of agreement of educational loan annexure-D, photocopy of petition of Shreekant Kumar for demand of Rs. 31,600/- annexure-E, photocopy of D.D. of Rs. 31600/- annexure-F, photocopy of certificate of head of department of commerce and business administration of L.N.M.U. (Darbhanga) Bihar, annexure-G, photocopy of D.D. of Rs. 10,000/- annexure-H, photocopy of transfer voucher of Rs. 1375/- annexure-I, photocopy of fee receipt dated 09-08-2008 annexure J & photocopy of letter to call for progress report- annexure-K.
Complainant has submitted during the course of argument that the o.p has not paid the amount of computer though the demand was made on his behalf. He has annexed same documents in sequence of annexure-10, but the same has not been marked. He has also not an adduced any evidence on this point. There is no evidence on his part to show that the demand made by him was received by o.p and o.p bank refused to pay the same. On the other side on perusal of the annexure-K it transpires that o.p sent a letter to Shreekant Kumar on dated 30-09-2008 for calling progress report and fee receipt . There is no evidence on part of the complainant to show that he served his demand on the o.p for demanding rest amount with requisite certificates and other documents. On perusal of annexure-19 submitted on behalf of complainant and annexure-D submitted on behalf of o.p it transpires that educational loan was sanctioned on agreement with terms and conditions mentioned in the agreement paper. Para-3 of the agreement is as follows.-
“at the end of the each Academic year borrower will produced certificate from the head of the institution at which student is studying testifying the result achieved by the student during and at the end of the year as well as student’s conduct. If the said certificate is not produced or certificate produced for any year is not considered satisfactory or in the event of the student failure of discontinuance of the studies the bank ( in its absolute discretion) have the right to stop giving any further financial assistance to the borrowers in terms of this agreement notwithstanding the fact that the total of the loan as agreed to here above has not been disbursed. The Bank will be entitled at its option to recall the loan already given together with interest accrued there on by a payment in writing.”
There is no connecting material on the record to show that the complainant has serve demand his with requisite papers to the o.p (bank) and the same was received by the o.p. In absence thereof it is not proved that there is any deficiency on part of the o.p.
In the circumstances of we are of opinion that there is no deficiency in service on part of o.p. and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the complaint petition is dismissed without cost. Let a copy of this order be furnished to both the parties as per rule.
