Orissa

Jajapur

CC/102/2015

Damodar Swain - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager,SBI,Jajpur Town Branch. - Opp.Party(s)

Harish Chandra Dhal

25 Apr 2016

ORDER

                IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.

                                                        Present:      1.Shri Biraja Prasad Kar, President

                                                                            2.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,

                                                                            3.Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.

                                                   Dated the 25th day of April,2016.

                                                      C.C.Case No.102 of 2015

Damodar Swain  S/O Late Keshab Swain

Vill . Jagatpur, P.O.Beruda

Dist.-Jajpur.                                                                                      …………....Complainant .                                                                       .

                          (Versus)

  Branch Manager,State Bank of India,jajpur Town Branch

     At/P.O/Dist.Jajpur.                                                                                        …………………..Opp.Party.

                                                                                                                                                     .                                                            

For the Complainant:                                     Sri Srikanta  Mohapatra , Sri H.Ch.Dhal,Advocates.

For the Opp.Party                                         Sri P.K.Daspattnaik, Advocate.

                                                                                               

                                                                                                      Date of order:   25. 04. 2016.

SHRI  PITABAS  MOHANTY,   MEMBER .

            In the present dispute the petitioner alleges deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.

            The fact relevant for the present dispute as per complaint petition are that the petitioner availed a loan to purchase a tractor vide loan A/C No.30357066927 from the O.P.  On dt.15.03.13 the O.P. vide letter to the petitioner agreed with settlement of the outstanding amount on O.T.S  by paying an amount of Rs.2,97,569/-.

            That the petitioner paid the amount of Rs.59,500/- on dt.30.03.2013, Rs.59,000/- on dt.30.12.2013 ,Rs.1,32,900/- on dt.31.12.2013 and Rs.51,000/- on dt.28.07.2014 and as per O.T.S agreement the petitioner has already paid the total amount.

            That the O.P received all the O.T.S amount and did not prefer  to close  the loan account on the plea that the O.T.S amount has not been paid within the stipulated period and sent a letter on dt.20.08.15 intimating the above fact to the petitioner.

            That the petitioner is an old and aged man and shocked by the letter of the O.P.dt.20.08.2015 and requested for closure of the loan account but the O.P did not pay any  heed to it, for which the petitioner has been constrained to file the present dispute with the prayer to direct the O.P to close the loan account due to payment  of the O.T.S payment and further the O.P  may be directed  to pay Rs.50,000/- as  compensation towards the financial loss and mental agony.

After notices the O.P filed the  written version taking the following defence:-

            In the year 2008 complainant availed the tractor for his own agricultural operation but he could not paid the banks dues in usual and regular manner for which the outstanding   loan   amount became more and more . To clear up entire loan dues complainant for the first time approached this O.P bank for compromise  his loan account under OTS scheme -2014, An OTS scheme of Bank is always guided by certain principle and guidelines for its acceptance.

            The complainant admitted that he could not have deposited the stipulated amount as fixed by banks OTS scheme 2014 within the stipulated period, for which the OTS proposal could not have been accepted by the O.P Bank. As OTS is always banks internal matter to clean up its bad debt account as well as its balance sheet. A commercial bank is always guided by its own internal official circular ,the OTS 2014 is also guided by banks internal circular as per said circular besides illegible criteria, and mode of payment time of repayment was also fixed, in the instant case though the complainant deposited his illegible amount but same could not have been accepted by bank as the amount was not deposited in time. As time is always essential feature of contract as the complainant could not have complied it in time hence the O.P Bank rejected the same .And it was duly communicated to him. That  the O.P Bank is always ready and willing to assist its borrower for compromise of loan account but same must be within the banks guideline, and norms as fixed by the O.P Bank. Accordingly the dispute is liable to be dismissed.

            On the date of hearing we heard the argument from both the sides. Perused the documents filed from both the sides and after perusal of the pleadings of both the parties we are inclined to dispose of the  dispute as per our observation stated below:-

            Admittedly the petitioner has purchased tractor taking financial assistance from the O.P. owing to irregularities in repayment the loan account became more. Thereafter  as per  request  of the petitioner the O.P agreed to settle the loan account on O.T.S  in case the petitioner pay an  amount of Rs2,97,569/-. And as per terms and conditions the stipulated date was fixed on 21.12.2013  to pay the settled amount . However the petitioner only paid Rs.2,51,400/- till 31.12.2013.

            Hence our considered view that the O.T.S scheme is the internal policy of the financial     institution  to recover  their outstanding dues. As such this  Fora  has no scope to entertain on this policy.

                                                                        O R D E R

                In the net result  the dispute is  dismissed against the O.P. No cost .                                 

This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 25th day ofApril,2016. under my hand and seal of the Forum.