In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 12 / 2011.
1) M/s. Impex International represented by Tapan Kr. Banerjee,
Stadium Para, P.O. Shantipur, Dist. Nadia. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) Indian Overseas Bank,
4A, Rupchand Roy Street, Kolkata-700007. ---------- Opposite Party
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Sharmi Basu, Member
Order No. 20 Dated 31/08/2012.
The petition of complaint u/s 12 of the C.P. Act has been filed by the complainant M/s Impex International against the o.p. Indian Overseas Bank. The case of the complainants in short is that complainant ran his business for earning his livelihood and he availed credit facility from o.p. against security of the assets mentioned hereunder by way of mortgage. In particular he availed credit facilities by mortgaging by way of deposit the title deed vide Title Deed no.1298 dt.19.1.1987 in respect of property i.e. Land and House property standing in the name of complainant and o.p. sanctioned packing credit loan to complainant for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- but he could not pay back for amount to the o.p. Complainant came to know that Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India (ECGL) made payment to o.p. directly regarding the loss sustained due to non-performance of export by complainant as complainant obtained a guarantee from ECGL against the aforesaid loan. But o.p. after lapse of 10 years on 30.12.10 made claim to complainant of Rs.8,62,257/- against loan of Rs.3,00,000/-. It is also to be mentioned that earlier o.p. vide letter dt.8.1.04 accepted offer of settlement by complainant and also issued letter on 22.1.04 confirmed the said acceptance of the offer of settlement of the dues of complainant. Complainant approached o.p. to make payment of the settlement amount but o.p. refused to accept the same on the ground of pendency of suit filed by o.p. against complainant and ultimately on 30.12.10, o.p. made claim to complainant of Rs.8,62,257/- against loan in question. Complainant made objection to o.p. through his ld. advocate objecting this claim but all in vain. Hence the case has been filed by complainant with the prayer contained in the prayer portion of the petition of complaint.
O.p. had entered its appearance in this case by filing w/v denying all the material allegations labeled against him and prayed for dismissal of the case.
Decision with reasons:-
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular and we find that the loan account of the complainant was classified as Non Performing Asset on 1.10.10 in accordance with the Reserve Bank of India Directives and Guidelines. In spite of repeated reminders and requests by o.p. to complainant he neglected to pay the outstanding due amount of o.p. Ultimately the Authorized Officer of o.p. has sent a notice dt.30.10.10 u/s 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial ‘Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 upon complainant for the payment of Rs.8,62,257/- as on 30.10.10 together with further interest @ 11% p.a. with monthly compounding rest from 1.10.10 for the payment of the said amount within 60 days from the date of the said Notice. as per section 34 of the said Act, no civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter which a Debts Recovery Tribunal or the Appellate Tribunal is empowered by or under this Act to determine and no injunction shall be granted by any court or other authority in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks an Financial Institution Act, 1993. Under Section 17(1) of the said Act, any person aggrieved by any of the measures referred to in sub-section (40 of Section 13) taken by the secured creditor or his Authorized Officer may make an application to the Debts Recovery Tribunal having jurisdiction in the matter within forty five days from the date on which such measures had been taken. Therefore, the right forum to adjudicate the instant matter is Debts Recovery Tribunal.
Moreover, as per decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court [I (2012) BC 472] that recovery of loan entertain challenge against proceedings under SREAESI Act is not entertainable by any Consumer Forum.
Relying upon the aforesaid decision we are of the view that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the instant case. Accordingly, the instant case stands dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Complainant is at liberty to agitate the issue before the appropriate forum on the same self cause of action.
Supply copy of judgement at free of cost as per provision of 21(1) of Consumer Protection Regulation.
