Date of filing :-11/02/2013.

Date of Order:- 13/01/2015.

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (COURT)

B A R G A R H.

Consumer Complainant No. 08 of 2013.

Smt. Panabai Agrawal, w/o Late Amilal Agrawal, aged about 61 years Occupation- Cultivation, R/o, Vill.P/O. Jamala, P.S.- Padampur, Dist. Bargarh.

                                                                                                                                                                                     ..... ..... .... Complainant.

- V e r s u s -

The Branch Manager, U.G.B. Jamala Branch, At/P.o. Jamala, P.s. Padampur, Dist. Bargarh.

                                                                                                                                                                                ..... ..... .... Opposite Parties.

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant :- Sri S.N.Padhi, Advocate with other Advocates.

For the Opposite Party:- Sri B.K.Mohapatra, Advocate with other Advocates.

P R E S E N T :-

Miss. Rajalaxmi Pattanayak ...... ...... ...... President.

Sri. Pradeep Kumar Dash ..... ...... ...... Member.

Smt. Anjali Behera ..... ...... ..... ........ Member.

Dt. 13/01/2015. -: J U D G E M E N T :-

Presented by Sri P.K.Dash, Member:-

The Complaint pertains to deficiency in service, enumerated under the provision of Consumer Protection Act-1986 and the brief of the Complaint is here under.

The husband of the Complainant being the customer of Opposite Party/Bank vide A/c No.12068027017 was incurred with an agricultural loan for an amount of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand )only on Dt. 23/06/2007. The loan could not be repaid by the husband of the Complainant due to poor yield and he (husband of the Complainant) died on Dt. 21/02/2010. The loan out-standing accrued to Rs.76,401/-(Rupees seventy six thousand four hundred one)only as on Dt. 20/09/2011 which was informed by the Opposite Party/bank to the Complainant. The Complainant was advised by the Opposite Party/Bank to be sanctioned with another loan with a much lessor interest of 4%(four percent) P.A. and she (Complainant) ought to be discharged from the loan liability of her husband.

Further contention of the Complaint is that, the Complainant due to her illiteracy could not understand the technicalities of the transactions and in good faith asserted to the Opposite Parties advice and a loan of Rs.76,000/-(Rupees seventy six thousand)only was sanctioned in favour of the Complainant on Dt. 22/09/2011 vide A/c No.84002898438. The Opposite Party/bank thereafter neither adjusted the previous loan out standing against the deceased husband of the Complainant nor released the loan amount sanctioned in the name of the Complainant and the Complainant is made liable for both the loans. The Opposite Party/Bank also did not reply to the pleader Notice of the Complainant Dt.08/10/2012.

Further contention of the Complaint that, for such negligent act of the Opposite Party/bank which amounts to deficiency in service by the Opposite Party towards the Complainant and the Complainant sustained a financial loss of Rs.17,000/-(Rupees seventeen thousand)only interest of both the loans, Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand)only towards mental agony and harassment.

The Complainant prays for the direction of the Forum to the Opposite Party/bank:

1. To release the loan amount of the Complainant and to pay the interest of both the loans from date of sanctioning of loan to the date of release of loan amount.

2. To pay an amount of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand) only towards compensation for mental agony and harassment.

3. To pay Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand)only towards litigation expenses.

4. Any other relief the Forum, deemed fit.

The Complainant in support of his claim relies upon the xerox copies of the following documents.

1. 1. Loan pass book issued by UGB, Jamala in favour of Amilal Agrawal.

   2. Demand notice Dt.18/10/2012 issued by UGB, Jamala to Amilal Agrawal.

   3. Pleader Notice on Dt.08/10/2012 issued by S.K. Dash Advocate Bargarh on U.G.B. Jamala.

   4. Postal money receipts.

   5. Postal AD cards acknowledging the receipt of R.L. ADS.

Being Noticed the Opposite Party appeared and filed version through his counsel denying most of the allegations of the Complainant more fully the allegation of deficiency in service.

The Opposite Party admitted the fact that the husband of the Complainant being the customers of the OP/Bank vide A/C No.12068027017 was sanctioned with an agricultural loan for an amount of Rs.50,000/-( Rupees fifty thousand)only. Besides this all other allegations of the Complaint was categorically denied by the Opposite Party.

Further case of the Opposite party is that the deceased husband of the Complainant namely Amilal Agrawal was defaulter in repaying the loan installments of the loan sanctioned in his name vide A/C No.12068027017 on Dt.22/06/2007 and for which Notices were served on him. The son of the Complainant namely Niranjan Agrawal was also sanctioned with an agricultural loan of Rs.70,000/-(Rupees seventy thousand)only vide A/C No.84002865059 After the death of Amilal Agrawal his wife Panabai Agrawal and son Niranjan Agrawal were requested by the OP/bank to repay the loan of Amilal Agrawal. Both of them came to the Op/bank and proposed to take loan from a private person and liquidate the loan Out standing of deceased Amilal Agrawal, if the OP/Bank would sanction Panabai Agrawal an another loan of Rs. 76,000/-(Rupees seventy six thousand)only. The OP/Bank agreed with the Proposal of the Complainant and the arrangements letter was signed by the Complainant for sanctioning a new loan, one condition of which was that prior to sanctioning the loan the Complainant ought to liquidate the loan account of her Late husband Amilal Agrawal. The OP/bank then sanctioned a loan in favour of Panabai Agrawal vide A/c No. 84002898438 on Dt.22/09/2011.

Further case of the Opposite Party is that the Complainant from the date of sanctioning loan i.e. 22/09/2011 by the Opposite Party/Bank till 28/01/2013 neither came to the Opposite Party/Bank to avail the sanctioned loan in favour of her by the Opposite Party/Bank nor liquidate the loan account of her deceased husband inspite of repeated message and request sent by the Opposite Party/Bank to the Complainant and as per the Opposite Party/Bank's guideline, which does not empower it to appropriate or adjust a sanctioned loan amount in a loan account of an irregular loan account of another person in his/her absence without submitting the withdrawal and deposit voucher by the concerned account holder and the Opposite Party/Bank is Justified in not releasing the loan amount sanctioned in favour of the Complainant. The period from Dt.22/09/2011 to Dt. 28/01/2013 till the date of closure of loan account of Smt. Panabai Agrawal the Opposite Party/Bank has to bear bank charges.

Further case of the Complainant is that the complainant and her son Sri Niranjan Agrawal have also availed two short term loans from Jamala Service Cooperative Society by showing, the same landed properties which they have shown to this Opposite Party/Bank. Further it is submitted that the Complainant and her family members are having actual cultivable land of Ac.7.00 decimals standing over MS Khata No.26 of Mouza Jamala but to avail loan/subsidy of Govt., the Complainant and her son suppressed the fact that they were cultivating an area of Ac 21.00 due out of aforesaid Khata No.26 of Mouza Jamala.

In view of the above facts and circumstance the Opposite Party denies any sort of deficiency of service caused by him to the Complainant and prays for dismissal of the Complaint with exemplary cost.

The Opposite party relies upon the following documents and case laws:-

1. Letters of arrangement Dt.22/09/2011 issued to Panabai Agrawal by Opposite Party/Bank.

2. Statement of account bearing No.84002898438 opened in the name of Panabai Agrawal.

3. Statement of account bearing No.12068027017 in the name of Amilal Agrawal.

4. Statement of account bearing No.84002865059.

5. Letter of Jamala Co-operative Society Dt.24/09/2013.

6. Letter of Jamala cooperative society Dt.24/09/2013 issued to UGB Jamala regarding not issuing of any no dues certificate in favour of Niranjan Agrawal.

Citations filed by the Opposite Party/Bank

1. Rev. Petition No.4797 of 2012.

2. Rev. Petition No.521/07.

Having gone through the pleadings of the parties upon perusal of the documents annexed to the Case record, reveals certain facts which are admitted by both the Parties as follows:-

Facts admitted

1. Being a customer of Opposite Party/bank the deceased husband of the Complainant namely Amilal Agrawal had in curred an agricultural loan for an amount of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand)only from the Opposite Party/bank on Dt. 23/06/2007 vide A/c No. 12068027017.

2. Due to poor yield the said loan could not be repaid by the deceased husband of the Complainant which accrued to Rs.76,401/-(Rupees seventy six thousand four hundred one)only as on Dt.20/09/2011 for which demand notice on Dt.18/10/2012 was also issued by the Opposite Party/bank.

3. The Opposite party/bank sanctioned another loan of Rs.76,000/-(Rupees seventy thousand )only in favour of the Complaint Smt Panabai Agrawal on Dt.22/09/2011.

    

The facts admitted need not be probe again.

The issues likely to be decided in this case are as follows:-

1. Whether the Complainant acted upon as per the letter of arrangement Dt. 22/09/2011 between the parties.

2. Whether any interest or surcharge is imposed upon the Complainant in consequence of loan Dt. 22/09/2011 sanctioned in favour of her by the Opposite Party/bank.

3. Whether the non appropriation of loan outstanding again the deceased Amilal Agrawal out of the loan sanctioned in favour of Panabai Agrawal or non disbursement of loan amount Dt.22/09/2011 to Smt Panabai Agrawal by the Opposite Party/bank is the deficiency in service as per CP Act 1986.

    

Neither the Complainant nor the Opposite Party/Bank have filed any documents as to whose initiation a ST loan has been sanctioned on Dt.22/09/2011. But perusal of letter of arrangement, it clearly reveals that in pursuance to the request letter of Complainant, the loan has been sanctioned where in the Complainant has put his L.T. I in the letter of arrangement Dt.22/09/2011 obeying the condition that the loan amount will be disbursed subject to closure of earlier ST loan vide A/c No. 12068027017 of her Late husband Amilal Agrawal. In execution of the agreement, the Opposite Party/bank sanctioned the loan in favour of the Complainant but as per the terms of agreement the Complainant had to close the earlier loan of her Late husband Amilal Agrawal and then loan amount sanctioned on Dt.22/09/2011 was to be disbursed by the Opposite Party/Bank in her (Complainant's) favour. But the Complainant did not close the earlier loan of her husband and has not acted upon as per the terms of agreement Dt.22/09/2011.

The Complainant alleges that she has sustained a financial loss of Rs. 17,000/-(Rupees seventeen thousand)only as interest for both the loans as on Dt.11/02/2013 but perusal of account statement vide A/c No.84002898438 i.e. Loan sanctioned on Dt.22/09/2011 by the Opposite Party/Bank in favour of the Complainant and the demand notice Dt.18/10/2012 issued by the Opposite Party/Bank do not reveal any interest upon the loan amount of Rs. 76,000/-(Rupees seventy six thousand)only sanctioned on Dt.22/09/2011, rather the Opposite Party/Bank has claimed interest Rs.35,253/-(Rupees thirty five thousand two hundred fifty three)only for a period of more than five years on the earlier loan amount of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand)only pending against her late husband Amilal Agrawal vide Account No. 12068027017. The account statement bearing Account No. 84002898438 has been closed on Dt. 28/01/2013 showing with out any debits from it. Hence no interest has been imposed upon the Complainant in respect of the loan sanctioned on Dt.22/09/2011 by the Opposite Party/Bank.

As per terms of agreement Dt.22/09/2011 the Complainant did not turn over to the Opposite Party/Bank at any point of time after the sanction of loan Dt.22/09/2011 and did not repaid the earlier loan outstanding of her late husband pending before this Opposite Party/Bank prior to disbursement of the loan in favour of her. Gone through the citations filed by the Opposite Party/Bank and found appropriate in this case as the Complainant did not act upon the subject condition of the loan agreement Dt.22/09/2011 by not closing the earlier account of her late husband. Hence the Opposite Party/Bank as per the stipulation and guideline of R.B.I. can't appropriate on adjust earlier loan of the deceased husband of the Complainant in the latter loan amount sanctioned in her favour by its ownself. Hence the non appropriation of loan out standing against the deceased Amilal Agrawal out of the loan sanctioned in favour of Panabai Agrawal or non disbursement of loan amount sanctioned on Dt.22/09/2011 to the Complainant do not amounts to any deficiency in service by the Opposite Party/Bank.

Hence owing to the evidence on record and circumstance of the case the Forum do not hold any deficiency of service by the Opposite Party/Bank to the Complainant and dismissed the Complaint without any cost.

Complaint disposed of accordingly.

Typed to my dictation

and corrected by me.

(Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash)

           M e m b e r.

                                                                        I agree,                                                                          I agree,

                                                           (Smt. Anjali Behera)                                                  (Miss.Rajlaxmi pattnayak)

                                                                 M e m b e r.                                                                      P r e s i d e n t .