(Passed on 17.07.2018)
Per Mr B A Shaikh, Hon’ble Presiding Member
1. This appeal is filed by the original complainant; feeling aggrieved by an order dtd.09.10.2012, passed by District Consumer Forum, Nagpur, by which the consumer complaint bearing No.12/569 filed by the complainant against the respondent herein, has been dismissed at the stage of admission.
2. We have heard the appellant in person and advocate Mr S B Walekar for the respondent and perused the entire record & proceedings of the appeal.
3. The facts in brief giving rise to the present appeal are as under.
a. The appellant filed consumer complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the respondent seeking directions as follows.
- It be declared that the respondents rendered deficient service to the appellant and adopted Unfair Trade Practice by refusing to grant loan to him and by providing false information to Credit Information Bureau of India Limited (for short CIBIL).
- The respondent be directed to provide reasons to the appellant about rejection of the loan application and to pay him Rs.10.05 Lakhs towards compensation for defamation of the appellant and mental harassment and litigation cost.
b. The Forum below after hearing the appellant in person, at the stage of admission, passed impugned order observing therein that it is within the power of the respondent bank either to grant or not to grant loan and therefore rejection of the loan application does not constitute deficiency in service on the part of the respondent bank. Therefore, the Forum below dismissed the complaint at the stage of admission, which is challenged by the appellant by filing this appeal.
4. The appellant submitted that the Forum below erred in dismissing the complaint when it is well settled law that bank cannot refuse to disburse the loan amount except for cogent and valid reasons. Thus according to the appellant there was no cogent and valid reason on record at the time of dismissal of the complaint, for rejection of the loan application. He relied on the decisions in the following cases in support of his submission.
i. Ratnakar Bank Ltd & Ors. Vs. Sandeep Kumar Ramaguda Patil & Anr., 2015(3) CPR 910 (NC).
It is observed by Hon’ble National Commission in the said case that the bank cannot refuse to disburse loan amount except for cogent and valid reasons.
ii. S K Sachdeva, Branch Manager, Canara Bank Vs. Baldev Singh & Anr., II (2015) CPJ 210 (NC).
It is observed by the Hon’ble National Commission that non-sanctioning of loan after having obtained all necessary documents from complainant, amounts to deficiency in service.
Hence, the appellant submitted that as the impugned order is illegal, it may be set aside and the complaint may be remanded to the Forum below for deciding it on merits.
5. On the other hand, the learned advocate of the respondent supported the impugned order and submitted that granting of loan is privilege of the respondent’s bank and unless the respondent bank is satisfied on all corners of the loan procedure, it cannot grant the loan. Thus, according to him, there is nothing wrong on the part of the respondents if loan is not sanctioned by them. Hence, he requested that the appeal may be dismissed.
6. We find that there was sufficient material before the Forum below to admit the complaint and to issue notice to the respondent and then to decide the complaint on merits. It was the specific case of the appellant before the Forum that false information was given by the respondent’s bank to CIBIL and due to that reason the bank rejected his application made for loan. Therefore, it was necessary to consider on merits the said complaint. We find that the Forum below erred in dismissing complaint at the stage of admission and thus the impugned order deserves to be set aside and the complaint deserves to be remanded to the Forum below for deciding it on merits.
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed as under.
ii. The impugned order is set aside.
iii. The complaint bearing No.CC/12/569 is remanded to District Consumer Forum, Nagpur for deciding it on merits.
iv. Both parties shall appear before Forum below on 03.09.2018.
v. The appellant shall provide compilation of the entire complaint to the respondent on or before 03.09.2018.
vi. The Forum below shall give reasonable opportunity to the respondent herein for filing reply to the complaint after the entire compilation of the complaint is provided by the appellant to the respondent, after remand of the complaint.
vii. No order as to costs in this appeal.
viii. Copy of the order be furnished to both parties free of cost and its one copy be also forwarded to District Consumer Forum, Nagpur for information.
