SRI NAYANANANDA DASH,MEMBER:-
The present case bearing No.C.C.52/14 is about complaint of a borrower against the bank for not allowing his loan account settled through OTS Scheme floated by the bank.
2. Brief fact of the case is that the complainant Mr. Bhikari Charan Sahoo,S/o:- Late Darsani Sahu of Vill/Po:- Kutaranga,Dist:-Kendrapara had availed an agriculture loan amounting of Rs.2.00 lakhs for the purchase of a tractor in the year 2001 for Rs.2.00 lakh. The loan bearing A/C No. 11388235973 was operated with repayment regularly in the initially later on the complainant defaulted in repayment of loan as the tractor remained out of order and being unable to repair the tractor resulting in loss of business, there was no repayment of the loan. Subsequently, the loan was declared as NPA on dtd.04.06.12. Being noticed from the bank, the complainant contacted the Field Officer and the Field Officer suggested that since the loan account had become NPA, borrower may take advantage of the onetime settlement scheme. The field officer reportedly told the complainant that all interest from the date of NPA shall be waived and further there shall be 30 per cent reduction of the original loan outstanding the field officer informed the borrower that the outstanding balance in the said loan account was Rs.54,729.75 and reportedly advised the complainant to deposit 30 per cent of outstanding balance of the loan before the application for onetime settlement could be considered/approved. Therefore the complainant deposited Rs.40,000/- on dtd. 30.09.14 but after that the bank is not settling the OTS scheme and instead of the remaining Rs.54,729.75, the bank is demanding Rs.28,000/- more for which the complainant is feeling harassed and undergoing severe mental strain. Further, the insurance made by the bank by debiting the account of the borrower, the bank has not supplied any cover note to the borrower and OP-Bank has insured the vehicle by debiting excess premium amount in comparison to premium of other vehicles (Tractor). Hence the borrower has filed this case with a request to direct the bank to settle the OTS application by accepting the remaining amount of Rs.50,729.75.
3. Being notice the Ops have denied the charge, through their written statement. The OP-Bank states that the complainant was intimated to avail the OTS scheme by paying Rs.1,23,439.87 which includes interest upto NPA date and pocket and legal expenses. The interest after NPA date have been waived. The OP-Bank also asked the complainant to pay 30 per cent as upfront amount of the outstanding balance and remaining 70 per cent shall be paid within 2 months from the date of acceptance. The last date acceptance of offer is 30 days from dtd.04.08.2014 or on or before dtd. 30.10.2014. It was specifically mentioned in the letter of the bank that if remaining 70 per cent of the settled amount is not paid within 60 days from the date of acceptance of OTS i.e. on or before 30.12.14, the OTS offered by bank shall stand automatically cancelled. The OP-Bank further states that the complainant after receipt of OTS letter dtd. 04.08.14 agreed to settle the loan amount on payment of Rs.1,23,439.87 and deposited a sum of Rs.40,000/- on dtd. 30.09.14. Thereafter, the complainant did not pay the rest amount within 60 days or on or before dtd. 30.12.14.Hence, the OTS offer stands cancelled.
Taking into consideration the various arguments by both the parties and perusal of different documents filed by both the parties, it is clear that the complainant had availed a tractor loan under agriculture purpose for Rs.2.00 lakhs from the OP-Bank i.e. SBI,Kendrapara in the year 2001. There was regular repayment initially but the loan account become irregular subsequently due to developing some trouble and the complainant being unable to rectify due to paucity of funds. Subsequently, the said account became a NPA account on dtd.04.06.2012. The Bank in order to recover the irregular NPA loans has floated one time settlement scheme which provides some concession to the borrowers in the form of waiver of interest and also some concession in the principal amount, so that old NPA loanees will be able to close their loan accounts. The launching of OTS Scheme,2014 by the OP-Bank was published by way of an advertisement and the OTS letters issued by the OP-Bank. Both the photo copies of the advertisement and letters are produced by the complainant-loanee into the present proceeding. The advertisement of OTS reveals that the beneficiary of the OtS scheme will get a maximum 30 per cent exemption on principal loan amount and no interest will be imposed after the date of NPA i.e. dtd. 04.06.2012 with other conditions. In the complaint, it is alleged that being impressed on the advertisement and on persuation of the officials of Ops, complainant came to know that he has to deposit Rs.94,729.75 paise uptgo dtd. 31.03.2014 to settle the loan account. Accordingly, complainant deposited Rs.40,000/- on dtd. 30.09.2014 against the loan account No.11388235973. But the bank officials after receipt of rs.40,000/- violated the terms and conditions of OTS and demanded Rs.28,000/- extra amount excluding the balance outstanding of Rs.54,729.75 paise. On the otherhand, Ld. Counsel for OP-Bank submitted that as per the OTS circular 2014/15 complainant has to pay Rs.1,23,411/- which includes outstanding of loan account as on dtd.31.03.2014 to the tune of Rs.94,729.75 paise and reversed interest prior to NPA is Rs.28,557.00 along with other misc. charges Rs.124.39 paise. OP-Bank to substantiate their arguments filed a copy of the OTS circular 2014/15 which reveals the eligibility and repayment concessions to the OTS applicants. It is further stated that Rs.28,000/- is a reversed interest and an accounting procedure reflect the interests and charged on loanees prior to the date of NPA and the said amount is added with the principal amount before closing of the loan account. The version of the OP-Bank is supported by the statement of loan account of the complainant bearing No.1138235973. It is revealed that the balance outstanding of Rs.94,729.75 includes the payment of insurance premium of the complainant’s vehicle to the tune of Rs.28,699/- ( Rs.13,220 + Rs.15,479) on dtd. 07.11.12 and dtd. 06.11.13 which are mentioned in the statement of loan account as debit adjustment as insurance premium charges of the financed vehicle.
Complainant disputes the OTS amount Rs.1,23,411/- as anillegal and arbitrary amount and further hammered that OP-Bank deviating from their words demanded Rs.28,000/- more excluding the balance outstandings of Rs.94,729.75. The allegations of the complainant as per our above discussion can be treated as unfair trade practice of the OP-Bank as per the provisions of C.P.Act ?
It is clear that complainant-loanee has paid Rs.40,000/- on dtd.30.09.14 to settle his loan account under OTS scheme. The documents filed by complainant reveals that he has to pay Rs.1,23,411/- to close his loan account. But in the complainant, it is alleged that as per the advertisement and version of the officials complainant has to pay Rs.94,729.75 the additional amount charged by the OP-Bank as per the complainant is not in accordance with the terms and conditions of the OTS scheme. In this regard we are of the opinion that the OTS offered letter signed by complainant-loanee on dtd. 01.10.14 is not illegal as the amount includes the balance loan outstandings, two years insurance premium of the vehicle and the reversed interest charged prior to the date of NPA, along with other Misc. charge.
Complainant in later stage of the proceeding impleaded SBI,General Insurance as a party alleging that the premiums deducted for the said purpose are high in comparision to premium charges of the same vehicle. It is further alleged that OP-Bank did not hand over the insurance papers to the complainant for which he suffered a lot. Though SBI General Insurance(OP No.3) is impleaded as a party and notice was issued through Regd. Post, but OP No.3 did not prefer to appear into the dispute and was set ex-parte. In this aspect both the sides are in fault. There is no written information to the complainant before taking and debiting the insurance premium from the complainant’s loan account, equally the complainant has never lodged any written protest before the OP-Bank regarding insurance of the vehicle which were raised before this Forum . That apart complainant has not adduced any evidence in support of his claim of deduction of excess premium in respect of insurance of his vehicle. Similarly, being aware of the one time settlement scheme of the bank, the complainant contacted the bank and there was some sort of negotiation process between the bank officer and the complainant. But it appears that there was some sort of communication gap between the two parties, whereas as per the version and advertisement of the OP-Bank on OTS the complainant was under the impression that besides waiver of interest, there was a rebate from the principal amount by 30 per cent which the rules of the OTS scheme does not provide flatly to all the NPA loans. The rules of OTS scheme was different to different categories of NPA loanees depending upon the age of the NPA loanees. NPA loans were of four types depending upon age of NPA loanees. The application for OTS by the complainant to the bank clearly states which type of NPA loans will be eligible for which amount of rebate. Further the leaflet for OTS scheme does not state that 30 per cent rebate shall be provided to all the NPA loanees., but generally states that NPA loans shall be eligible upto 30 per cent rebate. We have discussed the allegations and its counter at a length. We do not see any unfair trade practice committed by OP-Bank. It is so-called leaflet/advertisement which is misread/misunderstood by the complainant-loanee. In regards to the debit of insurance premium of the vehicle both the sides acted negligently.
Now, it is to be decide here that when the complainant-loanee has made a part payment to avail the OTS scheme but due to misunderstanding and lack of knowledge in banking procedure and being persuaded by the advertisement failed to pay the balance outstanding in stipulated period of OTS whether any relief can be granted in his favour ? Mr. D.K.Kar,Ld. Counsel for OP-Bank vehemently opposed that as the time limit under OTS-2014/15 has been lapsed complainant-loanee can not be fitted into a OTS scheme at this stage. Considering the submission of Ld. Counsel of OP-Bank, we opine that the complainant’s case is exceptional one and the same can not be compared, or cited or applicable to other loanees of general nature and for the other OTS applicants, if any. It will be more rational and logical to consider the OTS application submitted by the complainant on dtd. 01.10.14 of the same amount by deducting Rs.40,000/- deposited on dtd. 30.09.14 is accepted by the OP-Bank, without charging any interest on balance outstandings. One month time is given to the OP-Bank from receipt of this order to consider the OTS proposal of complainant dtd. 01.10.2014.
Accordingly, we disposed of the complaint.
No order as to cost.
Pronounced in the open Court, this the 31st day of May,2016.
