ORDER <br /> <br /> By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,<br /> 1. Briefly stated the facts of the case are as follows:<br /> In July 2002 complainant was in need of funds to obtain a job abroad for his son. To meet this requirement he applied for an agricultural loan to opposite party. He was willing to mortgage his landed properties and furnish sufficient sureties. Opposite party No.2 insisted thathe should join in Nithyanidhi Deposit Scheme. Although he joined this scheme and produced all requirements to avail loan, opposite party refused to sanction loan. He alleges ill treatment, mental harassment and deficiency in service against <br /> <br /> opposite party. Hence the complaint.<br /> 2. Opposite party No.1 has filed version. It is stated in para three of the version that there is no designation or post in the name and style of opposite party No.2. That there is only one opposite party and the version is filed on behalf of the bank. That complainant has not paid any consideration for the service rendered if any. That complainant is not a consumer. It is submitted that opposite party is vested with right and discretion of providing credit facilities. Opposite party denies all averments of ill treatment and harassment as untrue and false. That opposite party has not committed any deficiency in service and complaint is liable to be dismissed.<br /> 3. Exts.A1 to A7 marked on the side of complainant. Opposite party has not adduced any oral or documentary evidence. No affidavit was filed by either side. The points that arise for consideration are (i) Whether complainant is a consumer? (ii) Whether opposite party has committed deficiency of service? (iii) If so, reliefs and costs.<br /> 4. Complainant holds S.B.a/c No.8170/04 with opposite party bank. Ext.A1 is the pass book. The contention of opposite party that complainant has not paid any consideration for any services is unacceptable. Complainant is a consumer and complaint is maintainable.<br /> 5. The main grievance of the complainant is that opposite party did not sanction the agricultural loan applied by him. Even though complainant was willing to mortgage landed properties and furnish sureties, opposite party denied loan facility without sufficient grounds. The case of the complainant is that he applied for agricultural loan to raise funds in order to obtain a job abroad for his son. He avers that opposite party insisted he should join Nithyanidhi Daily Deposit. This averment is not proved by evidence. Opposite party contends that loan was not sanctioned because bank has a discretion to reject applications if not found viable. Opposite party further contends that<br /> he is obliged to protect the interests of bank and consider capacity of applicant for repayment. Complainant further pleads that on refusal of opposite party to sanction the loan he had to raise funds by selling his jeep and pledging gold ornaments. He has availed of gold loan from opposite party by pledging gold. This means opposite party has advanced gold loan even after refusal to sanction agricultural loan. Therefore allegations regarding ill treatment and mental harassment is unbelievable and not supported by any evidence. <br /> 6. In a catena of cases the Honourable National commission has held that banks have considerable discretion in the matter of sanctioning loans. Banks are also bound to follow guidelines laid down by Reserve Bank of India. The final decision whether or not to lend or advance money to any party rests with the bank concerned. The principle is laid in 1995 CPJ 99 Kerala SCDRC.; State Bank of Travancore and another V. S. Salaji. We hold that the refusal of opposite party to provide loan cannot be deemed to be deficiency in service.<br /> 7. In the result, the complaint is dismissed without any order as to costs.<br /> Dated this 16th day of November, 2007.<br /> <br /> <br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> K.T.SIDHIQ, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> <br /> Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil <br /> Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A7<br /> Ext.A1 : South Malabar Gramin Bank A/c No.8170/04<br /> Pass book.<br /> Ext.A2 : Nithya Nidhi Deposit pass book.<br /> Ext.A3 series : Nithya Nidhi Deposit receipts (5 Nos.) <br /> Ext.A4 : Possession Certificate of Landed Properties. <br /> Ext.A5 series : Letters by complainant to Manager (2 Nos.)<br /> Ext.A6 : Reply letter dated, 12-8-03 from Manager to Complainant. <br /> Ext.A7 : Requirements for loan dated, 7-11-2002. <br /> Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> K.T.SIDHIQ, MEMBER<br />