Orissa

Jajapur

CC/76/2016

Bidyadhar Mishra - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager,Odisha Gramya Bank,Kaspa Branch. - Opp.Party(s)

07 Jun 2017

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 7th day of June,2017.

                                                      C.C.Case No.76 of 2016

Bidyadhar Mishra  S/O Late Kunjabehari Mishra

At. Ramchandrapur, P.O.Ahiyas

P.S.Mangalpur , Dist.-Jajpur.                                                                            …… ……....Complainant .                                                                       .

                   (Versus)

Branch Manager,Odisha Gramya Bank, Kaspa Branch,At.Kaspa

P.O. Ahiyas, Dt.Jajpur.

                                                                                                                              ……………..Opp.Party.                  

For the Complainant:                         Self.

For the Opp.Party :                            Sri G.Ch.Panda, Miss B.R.Rout, Advocates.

                                                                                                     Date of order:   07. 06.2017.

SHRI  PITABAS  MOHANTY,   MEMBER .

Deficiency in banking service is the grievance of the complainant.

            The facts as stated in the complaint petition shortly are that the petitioner being an Agriculturist of Kaspa G.P within the Dist of Jajpur had taken a KCC loan of Rs.24,000/- from the O.P Odisha Gramya Bank Kaspa Branch for agricultural purpose . It is stated by the petitioner that the O.P had sanctioned the loan of Rs. 24,000/ in favour of him under KCC loan bearing A//C No.40710610001045 on 10.09.14 and out of  the sanction amount of Rs. 24,000/- the O.P kept Rs.562/ as Insurance premium .Subsequently due to crop loss owing to  natural calamities  the farmers of Kaspa G.P are entitled to  get 99 % Insurance claim since the crops were fully damaged.  .On the enquiry it is ascertained that the O.P has not deposited the Insurance premium of the petitioner for which the petitioner  has been debarred from getting  Insurance claim though  the crops has been fully damaged. In such situation the petitioner  has filed the present dispute with the prayer to direct the O.P make payment of 99%  Insurance claim and other relief as  deemed fit.

            After notice the O.P appeared through their learned advocate and filed their written version taking  the following stands:-

            The case is not maintainable against present branch manager. The Present branch manager is in  no way connected with the depositor nor deposit of Insurance premium on the loan Account of the petitioner. The matter as alleged is of the year 2014. One Jagadananda Mohapatra was the Branch Manager by then .He is not retired from service and is residing at Plot No.371 ,Neladrivihar BBSR (Mob.No.9439620133) .He is the proper person to clarify on the matter.

            The O.P also stated that the petitioner has no cause of action against the present Branch Manager. The present B.M. has no latches nor any liability in it. The O.P is in no way liable to pay any amount to the petitioner. The petitioner is not  a consumer to claim the benefit in the Hon’ble Forum. It is also the duty of the petitioner to see whether Insurance premium is deposited and certificate has been  obtained . The petitioner has never made any attempt nor made any quarry  for the deposits of premium and collection of Insurance certificate from the then B.M Mr.Mohapatra.

            It is further stated that When the O.P is became  aware he has credited, the amount of Rs.562.50/- in the loan account of the petitioner with interest . It is false to say that the petitioner deposited the sum for Insurance premium . The O.P is no way liable for Rs.24,000/- towards Insurance claim. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the present B.M . The petitioner is not entitled to any relief against B.M Mr. Mohapatra .

            Under the above mentioned reasons the case is to be disallowed against the present B.M.

            Owing to the above contradicting view on the date of hearing we heard the arguments from  both the parties after perusal of the record along with documents filed from  both the sides we are inclined to observe as follows:-

1.It is undisputed fact that the O.P  has sanctioned a KCC loan amounting to Rs.24,000/- in favor of the petitioner .As against the above sited loan the O.P debited Rs.562/-  on 20.10..14 for the premium of Insurance from the sanctioned loan amount .Further as per the terms and condition of the KCC loan the Insurance is mandatory which has been  done by the O.P. In the written version the O.P has  taken the stand that the debited premium amount of Insurance was not deposited by the Ex-branch manager who is  now retired and the said  premium amount with interest has also credited to the petitioner loan account on January-2017 . The present branch manager who is in  no way liable for the negligence of the previous Branch Manager .In the present case since the O.P has not  complied the terms and condition of KCC loan the blame un doubtly can be placed at the door of the O.P ,and subsequently returning  the premium amount with interest after receipt of notice of the present dispute is also gross deficiency in service. 

            The above analysis from our side clearly go to establish that  in view o the observation of Hon’ble National Commission reported in 1999(1)CPR-23(United India Insurance Co.Vers. Satrughan Sharma & Others) the O.P  has committed patient deficiency of service for which the petitioner has been debarred to avail Insurance claim .As such to meet the ends of justice we allow the dispute.

O R D E R

            The dispute is allowed against the O.P. on contest  .The O.P is directed  to pay the Insurance claim against the damaged kharif crops for the year 2014 as per  terms and condition of National Agricultural  scheme  after deducting the premium amount along with interest which has already been retuned by the O.P. As regards compensation we allow Rs.5,000/- for harassment and mental agony which will be paid  by the present  O.P  to the petitioner within one month from the date of receipt of this order. The above amount shall  be recovered by  the present  O.P  from the pocket of the concerned officer who has sanctioned  the loan in favour of the petitioner  as per observation of the SUPREME COURT in 1993(III)CPJ-7 vide para-19 (Lucknow  Devlopment Authority Vers. M.K.Gupta ) .                                                            .                                                   

This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 7th day of June,2017. under my hand and seal of the Forum.